On 02/26/2015 04:30 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>> On 02/25/2015 09:25 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>>> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>> On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>>> Andrey
On 02/26/2015 04:30 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/25/2015 09:25 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/20/2015
Andrey Ryabinin writes:
> On 02/25/2015 09:25 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>>> On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin writes:
> On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>>> On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM,
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/25/2015 09:25 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin
On 02/25/2015 09:25 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>> On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>>> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>> On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>>> This is
Andrey Ryabinin writes:
> On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>>> On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin writes:
> On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or
On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>> On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>>> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't use
> (or define)
On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
This is not
On 02/25/2015 09:25 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/23/2015 11:26 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/19/2015
Andrey Ryabinin writes:
> On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>>> On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't use
(or define) MODULES_VADDR. If you really want to hook here, you'd
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't use
(or define) MODULES_VADDR. If you really
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>> On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>>> This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't use
>>> (or define) MODULES_VADDR. If you really want to hook here, you'd
>>> need a new flag (or maybe use
Andrey Ryabinin writes:
> On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't use
>> (or define) MODULES_VADDR. If you really want to hook here, you'd
>> need a new flag (or maybe use PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC after an audit).
>>
>
> Well,
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Andrey Ryabinin writes:
>> Current approach in handling shadow memory for modules is broken.
>>
>> Shadow memory could be freed only after memory shadow corresponds
>> it is no longer used.
>> vfree() called from interrupt context could use memory
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
Current approach in handling shadow memory for modules is broken.
Shadow memory could be freed only after memory shadow corresponds
it is no longer used.
vfree() called from interrupt context could
On 02/20/2015 03:15 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't use
(or define) MODULES_VADDR. If you really want to hook here, you'd
need a new flag (or
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
On 02/19/2015 02:10 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
This is not portable. Other archs don't use vmalloc, or don't use
(or define) MODULES_VADDR. If you really want to hook here, you'd
need a new flag (or maybe use PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC after an audit).
Andrey Ryabinin writes:
> Current approach in handling shadow memory for modules is broken.
>
> Shadow memory could be freed only after memory shadow corresponds
> it is no longer used.
> vfree() called from interrupt context could use memory its
> freeing to store 'struct llist_node' in it:
>
>
Current approach in handling shadow memory for modules is broken.
Shadow memory could be freed only after memory shadow corresponds
it is no longer used.
vfree() called from interrupt context could use memory its
freeing to store 'struct llist_node' in it:
void vfree(const void *addr)
{
...
Current approach in handling shadow memory for modules is broken.
Shadow memory could be freed only after memory shadow corresponds
it is no longer used.
vfree() called from interrupt context could use memory its
freeing to store 'struct llist_node' in it:
void vfree(const void *addr)
{
...
Andrey Ryabinin a.ryabi...@samsung.com writes:
Current approach in handling shadow memory for modules is broken.
Shadow memory could be freed only after memory shadow corresponds
it is no longer used.
vfree() called from interrupt context could use memory its
freeing to store 'struct
22 matches
Mail list logo
