> On 14 Feb 2017, at 17:40, Mark Rutland wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 04:15:11PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
On 14 Feb 2017, at 15:57, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 08:23:05PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 05:49:19PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
> > On 14 Feb 2017, at 17:40, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 04:15:11PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> Having trivial 'off' switches for security features makes me feel
> >> uneasy
> On 14 Feb 2017, at 15:57, Mark Rutland wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 08:23:05PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Now that alternatives patching code no longer relies on the primary
>> mapping of .text being writable, we can remove the code that removes
>> the
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 08:23:05PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Now that alternatives patching code no longer relies on the primary
> mapping of .text being writable, we can remove the code that removes
> the writable permissions post-init time, and map it read-only from
> the outset.
>
>
Now that alternatives patching code no longer relies on the primary
mapping of .text being writable, we can remove the code that removes
the writable permissions post-init time, and map it read-only from
the outset.
Reviewed-by: Laura Abbott
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook