Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:43:00 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        mhiramat@kernel.org, bristot@redhat.com, jbaron@akamai.com,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        mingo@kernel.org, namit@vmware.com, hpa@zytor.com, luto@kernel.org,
        ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, jeyu@kernel.org,
        live-patching@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 15/16] module: Move where we mark modules RO,X
Message-ID: <20191025084300.GG4131@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20191018073525.768931536@infradead.org>
 <20191018074634.801435443@infradead.org>
 <20191021135312.jbbxsuipxldocdjk@treble>
 <20191021141402.GI1817@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20191023114835.GT1817@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20191023170025.f34g3vxaqr4f5gqh@treble>
 <20191024131634.GC4131@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20191025064456.6jjrngm4m3mspaxw@pathway.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191025064456.6jjrngm4m3mspaxw@pathway.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 08:44:56AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2019-10-24 15:16:34, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 12:00:25PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > 
> > > > This then raises a number of questions:
> > > > 
> > > >  1) why is that RELA (that obviously does not depend on any module)
> > > >     applied so late?
> > > 
> > > Good question.  The 'pv_ops' symbol is exported by the core kernel, so I
> > > can't see any reason why we'd need to apply that rela late.  In theory,
> > > kpatch-build isn't supposed to convert that to a klp rela.  Maybe
> > > something went wrong in the patch creation code.
> > > 
> > > I'm also questioning why we even need to apply the parainstructions
> > > section late.  Maybe we can remove that apply_paravirt() call
> > > altogether, along with .klp.arch.parainstruction sections.
> 
> Hmm, the original bug report against livepatching was actually about
> paravirt ops, see below.

Yes, I found that.

> > > I'm not sure about alternatives, but maybe we can enforce such
> > > limitations with tooling and/or kernel checks.
> > 
> > Right, so on IRC you implied you might have some additional details on
> > how alternatives were affected; did you manage to dig that up?
> 
> I am not sure what Josh had in mind. But the problem with livepatches,
> paravort ops, and alternatives was described in the related patchset, see
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1471481911-5003-1-git-send-email-jeyu@redhat.com

Yes, and my complaint there is that that thread is void of useful
content.

> The original bug report is
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160329120518.GA21252@canonical.com

I found the github (*groan*) link in the thread above.

From all that I could only make that the paravirt stuff is just doing it
wrong (see earlier emails, core-kernel RELAs really should be applied at
the time of patch-module load, there's no excuse for them to be delayed
to the .klp.rela. section) at which point paravirt will also magically
work.

But none of that explains why apply_alternatives() is also delayed.

So I'm very tempted to just revert that patchset for doing it all
wrong.