Messages in this thread | | | From | greg@enjellic ... | Date | Fri, 5 Sep 2008 08:36:40 -0500 | Subject | Re: Is SKAS still required for UML |
| |
On Aug 27, 3:06pm, Jeff Dike wrote: } Subject: Re: Is SKAS still required for UML
Hi Jeff, hope the week is ending well for you.
> > I tried to put this to a test, and actually failed to modify the > > UML kernel/memory image from within it. I had a simple kernel module > > with 'int val = 2;' and upon loading this, done printk("Val is at %p\n", > > &val); to get to know the address. A userspace program inside the UML > > then tried to dereference that address and read the value, but that > > ended in a segfault. /proc/xxx/maps also does not show the UML kernel > > being mapped in any process inside the UML. Note that I was running in > > SKAS0 mode, both host and guest are all 64-bit. Is the NX bit of the > > 64-bit platform securing things off, or has SKAS3 become sort of > > obsolete?
> SKAS3 is still a significant performance boost.
Any thoughts or timetable on SKAS4 going mainline? I suspect the SKAS3 patches are even remotely compatible with current mainline kernels.
We've had good success with SKAS4 on 2.6.24.x but thats even getting awful long in the tooth at this point. I've been meaning to try the last copy of the SKAS4 patch against 2.6.26.x but haven't found the time yet to wade through the flock of rejects which I would expect.
With all the renames in the impending 2.6.27 tree I'm afraid the prospects are even worse. The time seems ripe to push it towards mainline.
> Jeff
Thanks again for all your efforts on UML.
Have a good weekend.
}-- End of excerpt from Jeff Dike
As always, Dr. G.W. Wettstein, Ph.D. Enjellic Systems Development, LLC. 4206 N. 19th Ave. Specializing in information infra-structure Fargo, ND 58102 development. PH: 701-281-1686 FAX: 701-281-3949 EMAIL: greg@enjellic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Atilla The Hun's Maxim: If you're going to rape, pillage and burn, be sure to do things in that order." -- P.J. Plauger Programming On Purpose
| |