Re: What does tainting actually mean?
From: Nigel Cunningham
Date: Wed Apr 28 2004 - 00:30:32 EST
Hi.
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 01:19:32 -0400, Chris Friesen
<cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If only it were that easy.
There has already been a case mentioned of a binary module that messed
up something that was only visible once that module was unloaded and
another one loaded. It all depends totally on usage patterns.
I don't know what module you're talking about, but surely there must be
something that could be done kernel-side to protect against such problems.
Reference counting or such like? I guess if it was a hardware issue, but
then again that might be an issue with too many assumptions being made
about prior state? Maybe I am being too naive :>
Binary modules, on the other hand, are often loaded up by users that
know just barely enough to download them and run an install script. In
this case, it can be helpful to know up front that there has been
proprietary code running in kernel space, and aside from calls to kernel
APIs, we have no clue what else it was doing, what memory was being
trampled, what cpu registers were whacked, etc.
Now I see your point. Of course my previous point about patches is still
valid though: the tainted flag only gives part of the picture. The person
reporting the bug might create just as much of a black box for us by
forgetting to mention that they applied patch foobar.
Regards,
Nigel
--
Nigel Cunningham
C/- Westminster Presbyterian Church Belconnen
61 Templeton Street, Cook, ACT 2614, Australia.
+61 (2) 6251 7727 (wk)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/