On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 08:15:01AM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
This message leads to think that memory protection is not implemented
for the said architecture, whereas absence of CONFIG_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX
only means that memory protection has not been selected at
compile time.
Don't print this message when CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX is
selected by the architecture. Instead, print "Kernel memory protection
not selected by kernel config."
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <redacted>
Oh, yes, I like this. Should the message include a hint to the config
name?
Regardless:
Acked-by: Kees Cook <redacted>
-Kees
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
---
init/main.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c
index 2cd736059416..fd31b15cc910 100644
--- a/init/main.c
+++ b/init/main.c
@@ -1090,6 +1090,11 @@ static void mark_readonly(void)
} else
pr_info("Kernel memory protection disabled.\n");
}
+#elif defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_STRICT_KERNEL_RWX)
+static inline void mark_readonly(void)
+{
+ pr_warn("Kernel memory protection not selected by kernel config.\n");
+}
#else
static inline void mark_readonly(void)
{--
2.13.3
--
Kees Cook