From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stanislav Kozina Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/kbuild: enable modversions for symbols exported from asm Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 08:55:51 +0100 Message-ID: <0937c184-1946-c494-56b6-c38fd0b632c2@redhat.com> References: <20161129135118.24696-1-kilobyte@angband.pl> <30bb2db4-47bd-0c35-8328-ef032b551f06@suse.com> <20161129195721.GI2697@decadent.org.uk> <20161201051852.28dc335f@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20161201041325.GX35881@redhat.com> <20161201153215.43b6cec7@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20161201152039.GB35881@redhat.com> <20161209135041.5ff12770@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20161209135041.5ff12770@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nicholas Piggin , Don Zickus Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ben Hutchings , Michal Marek , Adam Borowski , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Kbuild mailing list , Debian kernel maintainers , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Arnd Bergmann , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org >> The question is how to provide a similar guarantee if a different way? > As a tool to aid distro reviewers, modversions has some value, but the > debug info parsing tools that have been mentioned in this thread seem > superior (not that I've tested them). On the other hand the big advantage of modversions is that it also verifies the checksum during runtime (module loading). In other words, I believe that any other solution should still generate some form of checksum/watermark which can be easily checked for compatibility on module load. It should not be hard to add to the DWARF based tools though. We'd just parse DWARF data instead of the C code. Regards, -Stanislav From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48026 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932146AbcLIHz5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Dec 2016 02:55:57 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/kbuild: enable modversions for symbols exported from asm References: <20161129135118.24696-1-kilobyte@angband.pl> <30bb2db4-47bd-0c35-8328-ef032b551f06@suse.com> <20161129195721.GI2697@decadent.org.uk> <20161201051852.28dc335f@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20161201041325.GX35881@redhat.com> <20161201153215.43b6cec7@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20161201152039.GB35881@redhat.com> <20161209135041.5ff12770@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> From: Stanislav Kozina Message-ID: <0937c184-1946-c494-56b6-c38fd0b632c2@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 08:55:51 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161209135041.5ff12770@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Nicholas Piggin , Don Zickus Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ben Hutchings , Michal Marek , Adam Borowski , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux Kbuild mailing list , Debian kernel maintainers , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Arnd Bergmann , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List Message-ID: <20161209075551.n2rIDEtscg6hNBrv1F-6cSMObHNMqw79s8tN2NFoRIU@z> >> The question is how to provide a similar guarantee if a different way? > As a tool to aid distro reviewers, modversions has some value, but the > debug info parsing tools that have been mentioned in this thread seem > superior (not that I've tested them). On the other hand the big advantage of modversions is that it also verifies the checksum during runtime (module loading). In other words, I believe that any other solution should still generate some form of checksum/watermark which can be easily checked for compatibility on module load. It should not be hard to add to the DWARF based tools though. We'd just parse DWARF data instead of the C code. Regards, -Stanislav