Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:43:21 +0200 | From | Jan Glauber <> | Subject | Re: Undoing module RONX protection fix |
| |
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 09:06:39PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 12:08:20 +0200, Jan Glauber <jang@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > How about this? > > > > To be honest I don't like the inverse naming like in unset no-execute > > too much, it makes me feel dizzy. But I wanted to keep the changes > > minimal. > > Yes, it should probably just be called protect_module_pages and > unprotect_module_pages. The current names provide far too much > information. > > But going back a bit, how did we end up with a NULL mod->module_init and > yet module->init_text_size, mod->init_size or mod->init_ro_size > non-zero?
printk'ing this reveals that mod->init_ro_size is not 0 but 0x1000. Therefore the first page was modified.
Looks like init_ro_size is missing the reset to zero at the end of the init_module syscall. Next patch ? ;-
> Because if start == end, set_page_attributes() is a noop, right?
Right.
> Confused, > Rusty. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
| |