On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 16:53:16 -0800,
"David D.W. Downey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>When building the kernel things buld fine with no errors other than the
>standard warnings generated by -Wall. Running the make dep bzImage modules
>modules_install command completes. Nothing big there, but when i
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 14:14:31 -0500,
"Jean-Francois Nadeau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dec 7 17:01:54 trinity kernel: EIP:
>0010:[update_vm_cache_conditional+138/328]
You are letting klogd convert the oops, it is broken. Change klogd to
run with "klogd -x", reproduce the oops and get a clean de
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 07:58:06 -0500 (EST),
"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Too many people just want to argue without even reading what they
>are arguing against. Again, I implied nothing. I said;
>
> (1) User traps, CPL3, stack for trap is in CPL0.
> (2) CPL0 has stack-fault (bad
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 11:30:06 -0500 (EST),
"Georg Nikodym" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>But since you seem to and while we're doing extreme surgery, why have
>klogd at all? Every other unix, kernel messages are handled by the
>syslog system. What problem did klogd solve and does that problem
>stil
On Thu, 07 Dec 2000 17:23:51 -0800,
Joseph Cheek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i'll check it out. i'm compiling ksymoops now, is there a way to get it to
>work without a static libbfd? all i've got is a libbfd.so, and i'm going to
>need to recompile binutils if i must have a libbfd.a.
ksymoops/M
On Thu, 07 Dec 2000 14:42:38 -0800,
Joseph Cheek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>loop.o built as module. this hard crashes the machine, every time
>[PIII-450]. i don't know how to debug this, is there a FAQ?
linux/Documentation/oops-tracing.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 12:36:01 -0500 (EST),
"Georg Nikodym" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> "KO" == Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> KO> I would prefer to see the oops decoding completely removed from
> KO> klogd.
>
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 23:36:23 +0100,
Florian Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I had the following oops while doing a "find -name" and playing mp3s on
>my SB live:
>0010:[ne2k-pci:__insmod_ne2k-pci_O/lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers+-2386971/96]
>It seems strange that the oops occured in
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:09:47 +,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In summary I'd say the lack of a task gate is at the very least an
>oversight, if not a bug.
>
>If no one else wants to do it I'll see if I can code up the task gates for
>the double-fault and NMI.
If you overflow the kernel stack then
On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 17:24:58 -0500 (EST),
"Georg Nikodym" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>sysklogd 1.3-31 no longer compiles using the latest headers in test11.
>
>Strictly speaking this isn't a kernel bug...
>
>sysklogd's ksym_mod.c includes
Speaking as the modutils maintainer and the person who ad
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 20:39:29 -0500,
Wakko Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Keith Owens wrote
>> Is there any chance of changing arch/alpha/kernel/traps.c to print
>> registers, trace and _raw_ code, in that order so it is more like other
>> architectures? You can pri
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 17:31:04 -0500 ,
"Boerner, Brian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The driver
>is generating a segmentation fault and produces and oops. I have included
>Code: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 b8 00 00 00 83 ec 34 68 00 2c 82 c8
That code looks bad. I suspect you are using an old modutils
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:27:10 -0700,
Steven Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If I have the cs46xx driver compiled either as a module or into
>the kernel, then 2.4.0-test12-pre4 locks up when KDE 2.0
>is started.
>[snip]
>When I say the system freezes, I mean it completely locks up, and
>ALT-SYSRQ-
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 16:26:42 -0500,
Wakko Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>PCI patches that were added between pre3 and pre4 allow me to boot the
>kernel on my noritake alpha. Once it boots, however, it oops's in the
>swapper. I've tried a few times in the past to use ksymoops on oops's on
>th
On Mon, 04 Dec 2000 07:29:10 +1100,
Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 3 Dec 2000 07:43:01 -0600 (CST),
>Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Keith Owens wrote:
>>> If you go down this path, please add a standard performan
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000 07:43:01 -0600 (CST),
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Keith Owens wrote:
>> If you go down this path, please add a standard performance monitoring
>> method to query the current capacity of an interface.
>Well, ethtool inte
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000 13:07:29 -0600 (CST),
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If yes, my guess is correct, I think the proper solution is to:
>* create a generic set_config, which does nothing but convert the calls'
>semantics into ethtool semantics, and
>* add ethtool support to the specific
On Fri, 1 Dec 2000 10:52:35 -0800 (PST),
Al Peat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've followed the thread on "Persistent module
>storage" but haven't come across a general explanation
>of the changes to the inter-module symbol stuff
>between 2.4test10 and test11. Anyone care to comment
>on the dif
On Fri, 01 Dec 2000 09:41:58 -0700,
Roger Crandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Killing interrupt handler
>scheduling in interrupt
>
>The kernel logs nothing and you must reset the machine to bring it back
linux/Documentation/oops-tracing.txt
linux/Documentation/serial-console.txt
-
To unsubscri
On Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:52:11 + (GMT),
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Probably you have modversions enabled (CONFIG_MODVERSION=y). Disable that
>and try again, or build as modules. 2.4 fixed this problem in the proper
>way, but I don't know what's going to happen about 2.2 ...
I have s
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:49:29 -0600 (CST),
Dmitri Matrosov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i got these modprobing module bttv on linux2.4.0-test11, when loading it
>at startup machine hangs oopsing in endless loop.
grep modutils linux/Documentation/Changes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the l
Linus, please apply.
The kernel incorrectly defines Elf64_Word and Elf64_Sword as 8 bytes,
they should be 4 bytes, Elf64_Xword and Elf64_Sxword are the 8 byte
versions. The type mismatch between kernel and user space causes field
misalignments if you copy a user space definition into the kernel
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 01:37:22 +0100,
Kurt Garloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>this is a 2.4.0-test11 system;
>rmmod -a (modutils-2.3.21) fails to unload unused autocleanable modules:
Designed behaviour. sys_delete_module only removes autoclean modules
that have been used at least once, either the
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:53:48 -0600,
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Binary patching? If you are binary patching something you need to get
>the exact location, one way or another. Whatever tool you use to
>extract the location of a symbol in an object file, that same tool
>should tel
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:22:59 +0100,
Kurt Garloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Find attached the modules.dep that caused this: There is a circular
>dependency of pppoe on pppox on pppoe on
The kernel code is broken. Circular dependencies make no sense, the
pppoe maintainer agrees and I thoug
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 16:02:13 -0600,
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [Albert D. Cahalan]
>> > Somebody else posted a reasonable hack for the [<>] problem. His
>> > proposal involved letting multiple values share the same markers,
>> > something like this:
>Me too. (: Keith posed
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 07:36:22 -0600 (CST),
Chad Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>int main(void) {
> printf("Size of an unsigned long is %d bytes\n",sizeof(unsigned long));
> return(0);
>}
>
>That simple program will tell you that an unsigned long is 4 bytes, or 8
>bytes.
>
>It is t
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:49:43 -0700,
"Jeff V. Merkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Microsoft drivers have an .INIT code section that is initialization
>ccode that get's chunked after it's loaded. Their model allows
>memory segments to be defined as DISCARDABLE, which tells the loader
>to chunk t
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 17:01:35 -0700,
"Jeff V. Merkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>insmod ppp_deflate (should trigger load of all these modules). I
>know it's works this way if there's a modules.dep file laying
>around, but it would be nice for it to work this way without
>needing the external
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:36:55 -0700,
"Jeff V. Merkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Keith,
>
>Please consider the attached patch for inclusion in all future versions
>of the modutils depmod program for compatiblity with RedHat and
>RedHat derived Linux distributions.
I have a big problem with Redh
On Sun, 26 Nov 2000 07:30:44 -0800,
"Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In reading include/linux/init.h, I was surprised to discover
>that __init{,data} expands to nothing when compiling a module.
>I was wondering if anyone is contemplating adding support for
>__init{,data} in mo
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 21:10:19 -0800 (PST),
Andre Hedrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, John Alvord wrote:
>> It also says "I do not know much about the details of the kernel C
>> environment. In particular I do not know that all static variables are
>> initialized to 0 in the ke
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:20:39 -0800,
"Android" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There is a link in /lib/modules/2.4.0.11: build->/usr/src/linux
>created by the Makefile (make modules_install).
>What for? depmod doesn't like this link. It gets confused.
grep modutils Documentation/Changes
-
To unsubsc
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 11:21:16 -0500,
"Steven S. Dick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 12:27:24PM +, Russell King wrote:
>> Keith Owens writes:
>> Steven probably wants to apply this patch to test11:
>
>How about we apply both that patc
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:59:30 +0200,
Oren Held <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I patched my test10 directly to test11 (I didn't use the PREs, so I
>can't
Upgrade to modutils 2.3.21.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:18:30 +0100,
"J . A . Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:58:37 Keith Owens wrote:
>> 2.5 kernel build wish list[1] has a couple of entries for standardising
>> the install targets. My thinking (and I know that so
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 12:27:24 + (GMT),
Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Keith Owens writes:
>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 06:10:54 -0500 (EST),
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steven S. Dick) wrote:
>> >2.4.0-test11-pre1 seems to have broken something.
>> >I h
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 06:10:54 -0500 (EST),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steven S. Dick) wrote:
>2.4.0-test11-pre1 seems to have broken something.
>I have no problems with test10, but test11-pre1 gives three oops
>messages during boot. test11-final gives the exact same OOPS messages...
Which modutils? And
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 05:26:20 -0500 (EST),
"Albert D. Cahalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Somebody else posted a reasonable hack for the [<>] problem.
>His proposal involved letting multiple values share the same
>markers, something like this:
>
>[]
What happens if the line is wrapped before bei
On 24 Nov 2000 16:40:50 -0700,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
>Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> [Matt D. Robinson]
>> > Any way we can standardize 'make install' in the kernel? It's
>> > disturbing to have different install mechanisms per platform ...
>> > I can mak
On Fri, 24 Nov 2000 15:37:33 -0800,
"Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that this is not a "final" version. I plan to go
>through all of the changes and bracket all of these new tables
>with #ifdef MODULE...#endif so they do not result in complaints
>about the table being d
On Fri, 24 Nov 2000 10:55:39 +,
Mark Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi all, consistently getting the following when pppd is terminated. Happens
>in 2.4.0-test11, fine in 2.4.0-test9, don't know about test10. Same happens
>for pppd 2.4.0b4 and 2.4.0, both recompiled for test11. Is this rela
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 23:09:18 +0200 (EET),
Pekka Savola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>EIP:0010:[de4x5:de4x5_probe+24259/37172]
>Note! EIP shows de4x5 for some reason. Please note that de4x5 driver
Because klogd tried to convert the oops and made a complete mess of it.
Always start klogd as "kl
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 13:36:35 -0500,
Steven Lembark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.0-test11/arch/i386/lib'
>cd /lib/modules/2.4.0-test11; \
>mkdir -p pcmcia; \
>find kernel -path '*/pcmcia/*' -name '*.o' | xargs -i -r ln -sf ../{} pcmcia
>if [ -r System.
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 02:25:33 -0500,
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Keith Owens wrote:
>> #define PCITBL(v,d,sv,sd) \
>> { PCI_VENDOR_ID_##v, PCI_DEVICE_ID_##d, \
>>PCI_VENDOR_ID_##sv, PCI_DEVICE_ID_##sd }
>
>* your macro fails for the '
[Adam J. Richter]
> +static struct pci_device_id atp870u_pci_tbl[] __initdata = {
> +{vendor: 0x1191, device: 0x8002, subvendor: PCI_ANY_ID, subdevice: PCI_ANY_ID},
> +{vendor: 0x1191, device: 0x8010, subvendor: PCI_ANY_ID, subdevice: PCI_ANY_ID},
It would make it easier to read and safer to type
This patch needs to be reviewed before it goes to Linus.
The ELF 64 bit spec defines
NameSizeAlignment Purpose
Elf64_Addr8 8 Unsigned program address
Elf64_Off 8 8 Unsigned file offset
Elf64_Half2 2
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 21:54:48 -0500 (EST),
"Albert D. Cahalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Under NO circumstances should klogd or ksymoops mangle the
>original oops. The raw oops data MUST be completely preserved.
>It is a serious bug that this is not what currently happens.
ksymoops prints the o
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 20:58:28 -0500 (EST),
"Albert D. Cahalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The infamous LINK_FIRST infrastructure was sort of half-way done.
>
>It would be best to cause drivers with an unspecified link order
>to move around a bit, so that errors may be discovered more quickly.
Th
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 02:49:27 +0100,
Frank van de Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>After upgrade to 2.4.0-test11 my copy of ALSA 0.6pre1 (cvs version) stopped
>working (causing OOPS on module load of snd-card-sbawe). I reverted back to
>2.4.0-test10 and verified that the problem does not exist in t
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 23:12:25 + (GMT),
Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>if (copy_from_user(mod+1, mod_user+1, mod->size-sizeof(*mod))) {
Using sizeof(struct module) is a nono in sys_init_module(), the code
has to use the user space size. Does this untested patch fix the
probl
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 14:01:36 -0800,
"Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just to avoid duplication of effort, I am posting this preliminary
>patch which adds PCI MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE declarations to the three PCI
>drivers in linux-2.4.0-test11/drivers/block. In response to input f
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 14:42:05 +0100,
Christian Gennerat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
>
>> I also left something else
>> that always annoyed me: valuable screen space (on a 24x80 vt)
>> is lost by these silly [< >] around addresses in an Oops.
>> They provide no informat
This is the "never release a security fix in a hurry" release. The
security fixes in modutils 2.3.20 had some side effects on some config
files. Linus knocked back environment variable MOD_SAFEMODE, instead
the kernel propagates the real uid that caused modprobe to be invoked.
ftp://ftp..kernel
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 09:57:02 +0100,
Christian Gennerat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The problem is in modules.conf
>Most users do not use "depfile" and "path" commands
>So they have not seen this problem.
>
>This was true for modutils-2.3.19, and older versions.
>With modutils-2.3.20 the syntax ha
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:17:47 -0700,
"Jeff V. Merkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Was there a reason we removed the -i and -m options from newer modutils
>and broke backwards caompatibility? I'm re-writing our module build
>scripts for the installer, and I discovered after upgrading to 2.3.20,
>t
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 22:11:04 -0600,
Matthew Vanecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi. I see these warnings while compiling modules in 2.4.0-test10. This
>is with RH 7.0's kgcc (why-oh-why did they base their system on
>2.96!!). It doesn't seem to break anything--I'm just curious as to what
>the
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 20:03:52 +0100 (CET),
Gerd Knorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Keith Owens wrote:
>> On my list for 2.5. If foo is declared as MODULE_PARM in object bar
>> then you will be able to boot with bar.foo=27 or even foo=27 as long as
>
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 07:16:52 -0800 (PST),
David Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>there is a rootkit kernel module out there that, if loaded onto your
>system, can make it almost impossible to detect that your system has been
>compramised. with module support disabled this isn't possible.
Wrong.
On 19 Nov 2000 12:56:17 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerd Knorr) wrote:
>Some generic way to make module args available as kernel args too
>would be nice. Or at least some simple one-liner I could put next to
>the MODULE_PARM() macro...
On my list for 2.5. If foo is declared as MODULE_PARM in objec
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 20:28:39 +1100,
Vincent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Nov 19 19:46:47 darkstar kernel: Unable to handle kernel paging request
>at virtual address dfdfdfc4
>Nov 19 19:46:47 darkstar kernel: *pde =
>EIP: 0010:[]
See linux/REPORTING-BUGS.
-
To unsubscribe from this list:
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 18:50:00 +0100 (MET),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rogier Wolff) wrote:
>Compile a kernel, marking "sx" and "riscom8" as modules.
>
>Install, modprobe sx, and voila, you'll pull in the riscom because
>its "block_til_ready" static was found to satisfy the block_til_ready
>from generic_s
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 03:07:47 -0800 (PST),
Anil Kumar Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>sorry i didn't ask the question properly. I need to
>know how does kernel modules accept run time arguments
>from user?
MODULE_PARM(variable, type) in the code. It defines which variables
can be set on the i
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 02:10:40 -0800 (PST),
Anil Kumar Prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>can anybody tell how to pass argument to modules?
RTFM. man modprobe. man insmod. man modules.conf.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [E
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:15:35 -0500,
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What is the difference between a module that exports no symbols and
>includes EXPORT_NO_SYMBOLS reference, and such a module that lacks
>EXPORT_NO_SYMBOLS?
When modules were first introduced, all symbols were automatical
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 20:00:49 + (GMT),
Tigran Aivazian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The mysterious lockups in test11-pre5 continue in test11-pre6. It is very
>difficult because the lockups appear to be kdb-specific (and kdb itself
>goes mad) but when there is no kdb there is very little useful
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:21:53 -0800 (PST),
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There's a test11-pre7 there now, and I'd really ask people to check out
>the isofs changes because slight worry about those is what held me up from
>just calling it test11 outright.
>
>It's almost guaranteed to b
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 20:00:49 + (GMT),
Tigran Aivazian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The mysterious lockups in test11-pre5 continue in test11-pre6. It is very
>difficult because the lockups appear to be kdb-specific (and kdb itself
>goes mad) but when there is no kdb there is very little useful
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 22:21:52 +0100,
Xavier Bestel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>as modprobe (insmod) args parsing seems POSIX compliant, we should put a
>"--" before
>what should be interpreted only as a textual argument, not as an option.
>This is a lot safer: whatever is passed, modprobe will tak
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 16:04:23 + (GMT),
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> request_module has the same effect as running suid. dev_load() can
>> take the interface name and pass it to modprobe unchanged and modprobe
>> does not verify its input, it trusts root/kernel.
>
>Then dev_load is b
On 15 Nov 2000 22:04:47 -0800,
"H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>No, it's correct, actually, but probably not what you want. It will
>include all letters [A-Za-z], but if a module named "ärlig"...
Trying to sanitise the module name in request_module is the wrong fix
anyway, the kerne
Due to the recent modutils 2.3 local root exploits, anybody using
modutils 2.3 should upgrade to 2.3.20. That means everybody using 2.4
kernels.
The security patch to modutils 2.3.19 only closed part of the exploit,
this version should close all known exploits. modutils still supports
meta expa
On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 11:52:50 +0100,
"J . A . Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have noticed that some kernel modules are installed under
>/lib/modules/XXX/misc,
>instead of /net. I have been checking the drivers/net/Makefile (little knowledge
Known problem. Fixed with a new make modules_i
On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 11:43:54 +0100,
>Why is there any reason that a shell should be invoked anywhere in the
>request_module->modprobe->insmod chain?
>If implemented correctly, this attack should have the same result as
>insmod ';chmod o+w .' (and it should not matter if it gets renamed so
>that t
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 17:35:37 -0600,
Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ok, I made this change:
>
>#ifndef __ENTRY_C__
>#define __NO_VERSION__
>#endif
>#include
>
>and in entry.c:
>
>#define __ENTRY_C__
>#include "include.h"
>
>Unfortunately, it still doesn't work.
__NO_VERSION__ must be def
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 15:58:38 -0600,
Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>First, I had a bunch of link errors on the redifintion of
>__module_kernel_version. To fix that, someone told me to do this:
>
>#define __NO_VERSION__
>#include
"#define __NO_VERSION__" must be in all but one of the sou
On 14 Nov 2000 11:42:42 -0800,
"H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Seriously, though, I don't see any reason modprobe shouldn't accept
>funky filenames. There is a standard way to do that, which is to have
>an argument consisting of the string "--"; this indicates that any
>further argu
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 12:31:41 -0800,
"Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>The only secure fix I can see is to add SAFEMODE=1 to modprobe's
>>environment and change exec_modprobe.
>
> SAFEMODE may mean other things to other programs, so that
MOD_SAFEMODE.
> It would be much
I would like a review of modutils 2.3.20 changes before issuing the new
version. There are two patch sets, the first is all the non-security
patches for 2.3.20, the second is all the security changes.
ftp://ftp.ocs.com.au/pub/patch-modutils-2.3.20-1.gz (non-security)
ftp://ftp.ocs.com.au/pub/pat
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:42:41 +,
Malcolm Beattie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Keith Owens writes:
>> All these patches against request_module are attacking the problem at
>> the wrong point. The kernel can request any module name it likes,
>> using any string it l
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:56:13 -0800,
linux-kernel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'll preface this saying I'm a kernel compile newbie and I could be making
>the most basic of mistakes.
You are. Hand editing the .config file gives undefined results. Make
all changes through menuconfig or xconfig.
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 23:02:10 -0600,
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[Torsten Duwe]
>> +for (p = module_name; *p; p++)
>> +{
>> + if (isalnum(*p) || *p == '_' || *p == '-')
>> +continue;
>> +
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +}
>
>I think you just broke at least
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:23:07 + (GMT),
Chris Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Either the kernel or modprobe needs to treat the module name with
>_extreme_ distrust, and I see no evidence of that.
Agreed. modprobe was not designed to run suid. Calling modprobe from
request_module has the sa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
A local root exploit has been found using kernels compiled with kmod
and modutils > 2.1.121. Kernels without kmod and systems using
modutils 2.1.121 are not affected.
Patch against modutils 2.3.19, it shou
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:58:17 +0100,
Jasper Spaans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>All right, here's another one, this time using the oops directly from the
>console -- this seems to give better symbols.. The 'console shuts up ...'
>works, the oops from the other CPU didn't get put out.
O, damn!
Originally sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] but that host is not resolving.
drivers/char/joystick/analog.c in 2.4.0-test10 has these lines.
MODULE_PARM(js,"1-16s");
#define ANALOG_PORTS16
static char *js[ANALOG_PORTS];
static int analog_options[ANALOG_PORTS];
Instead of hard coding 16 in
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 23:41:20 +0100 (MET),
"Peter H. Ruegg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I just tried to compile my first 2.4-Kernel. While dep, bzImage and
>modules all seemed to work well, I've got the following errors while
>trying to make modules_install:
>
>depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /l
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 14:39:09 -0500,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>6. In Progress
> * DRM and MTD cannot use AGP support module when CONFIG_MODVERSIONS
> is defined (issue with get_module_symbol caused fix proposed by
> John Levon to be rejected) (Keith Owens has fix)
Fix
On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 23:36:42 -0600 (CST),
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You mean trivial changes to understand the ELF magic number for a
>riscoid-ABI x86 object. (You wouldn't lie to the linker and call them
>SysV objects, now, would you?) Also gdb and libbfd need to know about
>
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 12:32:55 +1100,
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU3, registers:
>That's a pretty wierd trace. You seem to have addresses related
>to the `apm' kernel thread on mysqld's stack.
Normal unfortunately. Firstly the ix86 oops code
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 19:29:26 -0800,
"Matt D. Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We're removing lcrash from
>the kernel, putting it into its own RPM, and adding patches to the
>kernel for LKCD that build in crash dump functionality and make a new
>"Kernsyms" file so that we can dynamically read
On 10 Nov 2000 17:10:00 -0800,
"H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We can mess with the ABI, but it requires a wholescale rev of the
>entire system.
AFAICT, there is nothing stopping us from redoing the kernel ABI to
pass the first few parameters between kernel functions in registers.
A
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:15:54 -0800,
George Anzinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The notion of releasing a spin lock by initializing it seems IMHO, on
>the face of it, way off.
Normally it would be, but these are NMI and panic messages. The system
is pretty dead at that point, getting the messag
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:23:29 -0500 (EST),
"Georg Nikodym" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> C> i've manged to successfully compile 2.4.0-test10 kernel. however,
> C> upon startup there are some failed/error messages:
> C> 1. finding module dependencies: depmod *** Unresolved symbols in
> C> /lib/modul
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:32:49 -0500,
John Kacur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>When attempting to compile test11-pre2, I get the following compile
>error.
>
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o: In function `do_page_fault':
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o(.text+0x781): undefined reference to `bust_spinlocks'
>make: *** [vmlinux] E
25 separate source files declare extern int console_loglevel, many of
them define console_silent() and console_verbose() - unclean, unclean!
The patch against 2.4.0-test11-pre2 removes all the duplicate
declarations and adds console_loglevel, console_silent() and
console_verbose() to include/linu
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:32:49 -0500,
John Kacur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>When attempting to compile test11-pre2, I get the following compile
>error.
>
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o: In function `do_page_fault':
>arch/i386/mm/mm.o(.text+0x781): undefined reference to `bust_spinlocks'
>make: *** [vmlinux] E
On Thu, 9 Nov 100 12:15:19 -0500 (EST),
Rick Hohensee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>built the [2.4] kernel I'm using at the
>moment with gcc 2.7.2.3. I'm looking for "subtle run time bugs". OK, I'm
>desparate for entertainment. That's a given. Where should I look?
2.4.0-test10 kernel/module.c
sta
On Thu, 9 Nov 2000 14:56:05 +0100,
therapy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>arch/i386/lib/mmx.c does not export modversioned symbols.
>
>any module using include/asm-i386/[string.h/string-486.h/page.h]
>with 3DNOW enabled will fail to load.
arch/i386/kernel/i386_ksyms.c exports _mmx_memcpy, mmx_clear
On 8 Nov 2000 21:09:49 -0800,
"H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Remember that we cannot rely on ANY form of persistent storage to be
>available in the beginning; / may very well be readonly (on a ROM,
>say.) Since that means that we can't rely on writable storage being
>available unti
401 - 500 of 715 matches
Mail list logo
