Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 14:25:07 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> Cc: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, linux_dti@...oud.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, will.deacon@....com, ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, kristen@...ux.intel.com, deneen.t.dock@...el.com, Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/20] x86/alternative: use temporary mm for text poking On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 01:35:33PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 12:31:46PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > ... > > > > So while in general I agree with BUG_ON() being undesirable, I think > > liberal sprinking in text_poke() is fine; you really _REALLY_ want this > > to work or fail loudly. Text corruption is just painful. > > Ok. It would be good to have the gist of this sentiment in a comment > above it so that it is absolutely clear why we're doing it. > > And since text_poke() can't fail, then it doesn't need a retval too. > AFAICT, nothing is actually using it. See patch 12, that removes the return value (after fixing the few users that currently 'rely' on it).
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.