[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:07:30 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
arjan@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] Function Granular KASLR
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 07:39:55AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:27:30AM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > Let me CC live-patching ML, because from a quick glance this is something
> > which could impact live patching code. At least it invalidates assumptions
> > which "sympos" is based on.
>
> In a quick skim, it looks like the symbol resolution is using
> kallsyms_on_each_symbol(), so I think this is safe? What's a good
> selftest for live-patching?
The problem is duplicate symbols. If there are two static functions
named 'foo' then livepatch needs a way to distinguish them.
Our current approach to that problem is "sympos". We rely on the fact
that the second foo() always comes after the first one in the symbol
list and kallsyms. So they're referred to as foo,1 and foo,2.
--
Josh
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.
