Re: [RFC] modpost: add option to allow external modules to avoid taint
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 04:39:49 +, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: Non-text part: multipart/signed On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 14:26 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:20:03 -0500, John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com wrote: We really want to indicate out-of-support which is only a 1:1 mapping to out-of-tree for upstream kernels. Who are 'we' in this instance? Whoever turns this flag on. I was using friendly, inclusive language :) How does Debian handle this? All the modules in Debian's kernel binary packages are built in-tree. Backported modules are patched in as necessary. Debian includes many packages of OOT modules, but those are supported by their respective maintainers and not the kernel team. So for the kernel team, the 'O' flag does not mean 'unsupported' but may indicate that another maintainer should handle the bug (or it may also be irrelevant to the bug). So, in your case, the kernel team want to know what's outside their support, so this flag works well for you. As John pointed out, it's a bit useless for them. We could enable it with a config option, or they could ignore it, since they're going to module-signing route anyway. Perhaps it makes more sense to use the proposed module signing stuff in a simplified mode to mark built-with-kernel modules (eg. just put the sha of known modules inside the kernel). Unlike commercial distributions, no-one is paying Debian for support contracts and no-one can game the system by hiding OOT modules. So it's probably not worthwhile for us to use module signing at all. However, supposing we did go down this route, I would guess that checksums for ~3000 modules take up more space than the signature checking code. Instead, we could perhaps generate a key pair during build, include the public key in the kernel and then discard the private key. (But getting entropy would likely be a problem for the key generation.) Agreed, 60k is a bit expensive for this minor feature. Thanks, Rusty. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k45tnmgm@rustcorp.com.au
Re: [RFC] modpost: add option to allow external modules to avoid taint
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:20:03 -0500, John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com wrote: In some cases, it might be desirable to package a module from an external source tree alongside the base kernel. In those cases, it might also be desirable to not have those modules tainting the kernel. This patch provides a mechanism for an external module build to declare itself as an integrated build. Such a module is then treated the same as an intree module. Signed-off-by: John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com --- Any thoughts on this? I'm thinking of adding this to Fedora kernels, where I have been working to integrate the compat-wireless package as part of the base kernel RPM. I don't think the feature is useful it it's too easy to disable. Experience has shown this with license tags. We really want to indicate out-of-support which is only a 1:1 mapping to out-of-tree for upstream kernels. How does Debian handle this? Perhaps it makes more sense to use the proposed module signing stuff in a simplified mode to mark built-with-kernel modules (eg. just put the sha of known modules inside the kernel). I think we should revert this change, meanwhile, and figure out what to do. Cheers, Rusty. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxatp3ty@rustcorp.com.au
Re: [RFC] modpost: add option to allow external modules to avoid taint
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 14:26 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:20:03 -0500, John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com wrote: In some cases, it might be desirable to package a module from an external source tree alongside the base kernel. In those cases, it might also be desirable to not have those modules tainting the kernel. This patch provides a mechanism for an external module build to declare itself as an integrated build. Such a module is then treated the same as an intree module. Signed-off-by: John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com --- Any thoughts on this? I'm thinking of adding this to Fedora kernels, where I have been working to integrate the compat-wireless package as part of the base kernel RPM. I don't think the feature is useful it it's too easy to disable. Experience has shown this with license tags. We really want to indicate out-of-support which is only a 1:1 mapping to out-of-tree for upstream kernels. Who are 'we' in this instance? How does Debian handle this? All the modules in Debian's kernel binary packages are built in-tree. Backported modules are patched in as necessary. Debian includes many packages of OOT modules, but those are supported by their respective maintainers and not the kernel team. So for the kernel team, the 'O' flag does not mean 'unsupported' but may indicate that another maintainer should handle the bug (or it may also be irrelevant to the bug). Perhaps it makes more sense to use the proposed module signing stuff in a simplified mode to mark built-with-kernel modules (eg. just put the sha of known modules inside the kernel). Unlike commercial distributions, no-one is paying Debian for support contracts and no-one can game the system by hiding OOT modules. So it's probably not worthwhile for us to use module signing at all. However, supposing we did go down this route, I would guess that checksums for ~3000 modules take up more space than the signature checking code. Instead, we could perhaps generate a key pair during build, include the public key in the kernel and then discard the private key. (But getting entropy would likely be a problem for the key generation.) Ben. I think we should revert this change, meanwhile, and figure out what to do. Cheers, Rusty. -- Ben Hutchings Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [RFC] modpost: add option to allow external modules to avoid taint
On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 11:20 -0500, John W. Linville wrote: In some cases, it might be desirable to package a module from an external source tree alongside the base kernel. In those cases, it might also be desirable to not have those modules tainting the kernel. This patch provides a mechanism for an external module build to declare itself as an integrated build. Such a module is then treated the same as an intree module. Signed-off-by: John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com --- Any thoughts on this? I'm thinking of adding this to Fedora kernels, where I have been working to integrate the compat-wireless package as part of the base kernel RPM. [...] If you're integrating it then why can't you *really* build it in-tree? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[RFC] modpost: add option to allow external modules to avoid taint
In some cases, it might be desirable to package a module from an
external source tree alongside the base kernel. In those cases, it
might also be desirable to not have those modules tainting the kernel.
This patch provides a mechanism for an external module build to declare
itself as an integrated build. Such a module is then treated the same
as an intree module.
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com
---
Any thoughts on this? I'm thinking of adding this to Fedora kernels,
where I have been working to integrate the compat-wireless package as
part of the base kernel RPM.
scripts/Makefile.modpost |1 +
scripts/mod/modpost.c| 10 --
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.modpost b/scripts/Makefile.modpost
index 08dce14..160c6fb 100644
--- a/scripts/Makefile.modpost
+++ b/scripts/Makefile.modpost
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ modpost = scripts/mod/modpost\
$(if $(KBUILD_EXTMOD),-o $(modulesymfile)) \
$(if $(CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH),,-S) \
$(if $(KBUILD_EXTMOD)$(KBUILD_MODPOST_WARN),-w) \
+ $(if $(INTEGRATED_BUILD),-B) \
$(if $(cross_build),-c)
quiet_cmd_modpost = MODPOST $(words $(filter-out vmlinux FORCE, $^)) modules
diff --git a/scripts/mod/modpost.c b/scripts/mod/modpost.c
index 2bd594e..5d077f9 100644
--- a/scripts/mod/modpost.c
+++ b/scripts/mod/modpost.c
@@ -43,6 +43,9 @@ static int warn_unresolved = 0;
static int sec_mismatch_count = 0;
static int sec_mismatch_verbose = 1;
+/* Is this a module being built as part of an integrated package? */
+static int integrated_build = 0;
+
enum export {
export_plain, export_unused, export_gpl,
export_unused_gpl, export_gpl_future, export_unknown
@@ -1851,7 +1854,7 @@ static void add_header(struct buffer *b, struct module
*mod)
static void add_intree_flag(struct buffer *b, int is_intree)
{
- if (is_intree)
+ if (is_intree || integrated_build)
buf_printf(b, \nMODULE_INFO(intree, \Y\);\n);
}
@@ -2101,7 +2104,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
struct ext_sym_list *extsym_iter;
struct ext_sym_list *extsym_start = NULL;
- while ((opt = getopt(argc, argv, i:I:e:cmsSo:awM:K:)) != -1) {
+ while ((opt = getopt(argc, argv, i:I:e:cmsSo:awM:K:B)) != -1) {
switch (opt) {
case 'i':
kernel_read = optarg;
@@ -2139,6 +2142,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
case 'w':
warn_unresolved = 1;
break;
+ case 'B':
+ integrated_build = 1;
+ break;
default:
exit(1);
}
--
1.7.4.4
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1323879603-2961-1-git-send-email-linvi...@tuxdriver.com
Re: [RFC] modpost: add option to allow external modules to avoid taint
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 04:52:00PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2011-12-14 at 11:20 -0500, John W. Linville wrote: In some cases, it might be desirable to package a module from an external source tree alongside the base kernel. In those cases, it might also be desirable to not have those modules tainting the kernel. This patch provides a mechanism for an external module build to declare itself as an integrated build. Such a module is then treated the same as an intree module. Signed-off-by: John W. Linville linvi...@tuxdriver.com --- Any thoughts on this? I'm thinking of adding this to Fedora kernels, where I have been working to integrate the compat-wireless package as part of the base kernel RPM. [...] If you're integrating it then why can't you *really* build it in-tree? Well, of course, I could. But it would be a _huge_ waste of my time doing so. The compat-wireless package is already sitting there, complete with all the necessary backporting infrastructure. It's all fat and juicy, waiting to be used. Wasting time replicating that just doesn't make any sense to my mind. John -- John W. LinvilleSomeday the world will need a hero, and you linvi...@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111214173922.ga2...@tuxdriver.com
