Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759257AbYAXUpl (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:45:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758696AbYAXUil (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:38:41 -0500 Received: from dallas.jonmasters.org ([72.29.103.172]:35577 "EHLO dallas.jonmasters.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758697AbYAXUij (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:38:39 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers Support for Proprierary Modules From: Jon Masters To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Andrew Morton , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, "Frank Ch. Eigler" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Rusty Russell , Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: <20080124124703.GB32559@Krystal> References: <1201029235.18144.62.camel@perihelion> <20080123031005.GA16766@Krystal> <1201061860.25284.28.camel@perihelion> <20080123131442.GA6562@redhat.com> <20080123144811.GA12296@Krystal> <27267.1201152358@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <1201155569.25284.88.camel@perihelion> <20080124124703.GB32559@Krystal> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: World Organi[sz]ation Of Broken Dreams Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:35:31 -0500 Message-Id: <1201206932.25284.143.camel@perihelion> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.2 (2.12.2-2.fc8) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Do-Not-Run: Yes X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 74.92.29.237 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: jonathan@jonmasters.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on dallas.jonmasters.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1302 Lines: 30 On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 07:47 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > There seems to be good arguments for markers to support proprierary modules. So > I am throwing this one-liner in and let's see how people react. It only makes > sure that a module that has been "forced" to be loaded won't have its markers > used. It is important to leave this check to make sure the kernel does not crash > by expecting the markers part of the struct module by mistake in the case there > is an incorrect checksum. > > It applies fine on 2.6.24-rc8-git3. I think this should go in. Signed-off-by: Jon Masters Jon. P.S. wondering out loud to myself, I finally realized the reason we need a leaf struct_module function in kernel/module.c. We don't necessarily have anything else checking for changes to struct module on module load without this, and we have an embedded struct module in each module that we memory map as we load the module. I did wonder what was protecting us from that (especially forced loads). But Rusty does think of everything. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/