Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:11:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Carstens >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:11:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Carstens >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: >> >> > Heiko Carstens (2): >> >> > vmlinux.lds.h:

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:11:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Carstens > wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> > Heiko Carstens (2): > >> > vmlinux.lds.h: allow arch specific handling of

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 11:11:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Carstens > wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> > Heiko Carstens (2): > >> > vmlinux.lds.h: allow arch specific handling of ro_after_init data > >> >

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: >> > Heiko Carstens (2): >> > vmlinux.lds.h: allow arch specific handling of ro_after_init data section >> > s390/mm: add proper __ro_after_init

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: >> > Heiko Carstens (2): >> > vmlinux.lds.h: allow arch specific handling of ro_after_init data section >> > s390/mm: add proper __ro_after_init support >> > >> >

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > Heiko Carstens (2): > > vmlinux.lds.h: allow arch specific handling of ro_after_init data section > > s390/mm: add proper __ro_after_init support > > > > arch/s390/include/asm/cache.h | 3 --- > >

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:49:14AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > Heiko Carstens (2): > > vmlinux.lds.h: allow arch specific handling of ro_after_init data section > > s390/mm: add proper __ro_after_init support > > > > arch/s390/include/asm/cache.h | 3 --- > >

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 5:06 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > These two patches allow a proper ro_after_init implementation on s390. > > The current implementation maps __ro_after_init to __read_mostly, > which means that ro_after_init data won't be write protected at all. >

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 5:06 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > These two patches allow a proper ro_after_init implementation on s390. > > The current implementation maps __ro_after_init to __read_mostly, > which means that ro_after_init data won't be write protected at all. > > Reason for this is that

[PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

These two patches allow a proper ro_after_init implementation on s390. The current implementation maps __ro_after_init to __read_mostly, which means that ro_after_init data won't be write protected at all. Reason for this is that s390 write protects rodata very early (before init calls) and

[PATCH 0/2] Proper ro_after_init implementation on s390

These two patches allow a proper ro_after_init implementation on s390. The current implementation maps __ro_after_init to __read_mostly, which means that ro_after_init data won't be write protected at all. Reason for this is that s390 write protects rodata very early (before init calls) and