Re: [PATCH V2] x86/ftrace: Make sure that ftrace trampolines are not RWX

[Heiko Carstens]

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 09:03:13AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > It seems like it really should. That would put it in a single place
> > and avoid this mistake again in the future. Does module_memfree() have
> > access to the allocation size, or does that need to get plumbed?
> 
> No, it doesn't. But the number of instances is pretty limited.
> 
> Btw, looking at BPF. It allocates memory via module_alloc() which means
> it's RWX. There is nothing in that BPF code which changes the permissions
> afterwards ....

For BPF you're probably referring to bpf_jit_binary_alloc()? Permissions
are changed with bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro() within each architecure backend.

Well, except for powerpc (cc'ed Michael).