Messages in this thread | | | From | Chris Mason <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next] modules: allow modprobe load regular elf binaries | Date | Tue, 6 Mar 2018 15:42:41 -0800 |
| |
On 6 Mar 2018, at 11:12, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> > wrote: >> As the first step in development of bpfilter project [1] the >> request_module() >> code is extended to allow user mode helpers to be invoked. Idea is >> that >> user mode helpers are built as part of the kernel build and installed >> as >> traditional kernel modules with .ko file extension into distro >> specified >> location, such that from a distribution point of view, they are no >> different >> than regular kernel modules. Thus, allow request_module() logic to >> load such >> user mode helper (umh) modules via: > [,,] > > I like this, but I have one request: can we make sure that this action > is visible in the system messages? > > When we load a regular module, at least it shows in lsmod afterwards, > although I have a few times wanted to really see module load as an > event in the logs too. > > When we load a module that just executes a user program, and there is > no sign of it in the module list, I think we *really* need to make > that event show to the admin some way. > > .. and yes, maybe we'll need to rate-limit the messages, and maybe it > turns out that I'm entirely wrong and people will hate the messages > after they get used to the concept of these pseudo-modules, but > particularly for the early implementation when this is a new thing, I > really want a message like > > executed user process xyz-abc as a pseudo-module > > or something in dmesg. > > I do *not* want this to be a magical way to hide things.
Especially early on, this makes a lot of sense. But I wanted to plug bps and the hopefully growing set of bpf introspection tools:
https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/master/introspection/bps_example.txt
Long term these are probably a good place to tell the admin what's going on.
-chris
| |