Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:05:05 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce post-init read-only memory * Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote: > >> - print a warning and a backtrace, and just mark the page read-write > >> so that the machine survives, but we get notified and can fix whatever > >> broken code > > > > This seems very easy to add. Should I basically reverse the effects of > > mark_rodata_ro(), or should I only make the new ro-after-init section as RW? > > (I think the former would be easier.) > > I'd suggest verifying that the page in question is .data..ro_after_init and, if > so, marking that one page RW. Yes, this was PaX's suggestion as well, and I agree: doing that turns a quite possibly unrecoverable boot/shutdown time or suspend/resume time (suspend is really a special category of 'bootup') crasher oops into a more informative stack dump. These ro related faults tend to trigger when init/deinit is running, and oopsing in those sequences is typically a lot less survivable than say oopsing in a high level system call while not holding locks. Thanks, Ingo
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.