[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 14:34:04 +0300
From: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...wei.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Tetsuo Handa
<penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
CC: <keescook@...omium.org>, <mhocko@...nel.org>, <jmorris@...ei.org>,
<paul@...l-moore.com>, <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>, <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
<labbott@...hat.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Protectable Memory Allocator
On 06/06/17 09:25, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 01:44:32PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
[..]
>> As far as I know, not all CONFIG_MMU=y architectures provide
>> set_memory_ro()/set_memory_rw(). You need to provide fallback for
>> architectures which do not provide set_memory_ro()/set_memory_rw()
>> or kernels built with CONFIG_MMU=n.
>
> I think we'll just need to generalize CONFIG_STRICT_MODULE_RWX and/or
> ARCH_HAS_STRICT_MODULE_RWX so there is a symbol to key this off.
Would STRICT_KERNEL_RWX work? It's already present.
If both kernel text and rodata can be protected, so can pmalloc data.
---
igor
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
