Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: An In-Kernel x86 Disassembler For Linux Kernel

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,636

    Default An In-Kernel x86 Disassembler For Linux Kernel

    Phoronix: An In-Kernel x86 Disassembler For Linux Kernel

    Patches for an x86 disassembler for the Linux kernel have been proposed. An in-kernel disassembler could prove useful for developers in cases of kernel panics and other happenings...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA4MTI

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,194

    Default

    Linus thinks disassmblers and debuggers are for people who cant code.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    That could also be used for safe sandboxing: the disassembler could be combined with the assembler to ensure that binary code submitted to the kernel is 'safe' to execute - even in kernel-space.
    So we will finally get the truth behind the binary BLOBs...? Not sure if AMD/Nvidia will like that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Yaay, let's put everything into the kernel. In 2 years we pull in gcc, in 3 years we'll have in-kernel firefox. Kernelcode is just *faster*.
    I fear for Tanenbaum's health today.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mazumoto View Post
    Yaay, let's put everything into the kernel. In 2 years we pull in gcc, in 3 years we'll have in-kernel firefox. Kernelcode is just *faster*.
    I fear for Tanenbaum's health today.
    I think you have misinterpreted something:

    the disassembler could be combined with the assembler to ensure that binary code submitted to the kernel is 'safe' to execute - even in kernel-space.
    isn't equal to:

    submitted to inclusion

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TAXI View Post
    So we will finally get the truth behind the binary BLOBs...? Not sure if AMD/Nvidia will like that.
    They will if it will show blobs aren't doing nasty things. That will probably mean you don't have to use Open Source drivers to be more secure.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    They will if it will show blobs aren't doing nasty things. That will probably mean you don't have to use Open Source drivers to be more secure.
    They do everything to keep their BLOBs a secret. They even contain codes not owned by the company (third party code) so seeing the sources will be a legal disaster. Do you still think they will like it that the code gets disassembled on-the-fly? I think their lawyers won't even notice that (as long as there is no crash) the disassembled code won't be shown to the users, they just read "disassemble" and cry: No!

    //EDIT: Also, what will happen if the UVD part of fglrx crashes Bridgemans PC? He will have disassembled, copyrighted UVD code at his screen... Will he ever be allowed to even think about implementing UVD into the FOSS driver again?
    Last edited by TAXI; 04-05-2012 at 04:20 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TAXI View Post
    They do everything to keep their BLOBs a secret. They even contain codes not owned by the company (third party code) so seeing the sources will be a legal disaster. Do you still think they will like it that the code gets disassembled on-the-fly? I think their lawyers won't even notice that (as long as there is no crash) the disassembled code won't be shown to the users, they just read "disassemble" and cry: No!

    //EDIT: Also, what will happen if the UVD part of fglrx crashes Bridgemans PC? He will have disassembled, copyrighted UVD code at his screen... Will he ever be allowed to even think about implementing UVD into the FOSS driver again?
    1. How old are olly and softice? Any "tragedies" since then? If someone really wanted to, he would already have ripped everything away. You donīt need linux kernel disassembler for that. Actually, I think amd and nvidia rip periodically parts of each other.

    2. (EDIT) If they put debugging symbols etc that would be their problem. And I donīt think Bridgeman uses linux, eitherway he is not forced to it.

    "Will he ever be allowed to even think about"
    I never knew AMD censors his brains.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TAXI View Post
    They do everything to keep their BLOBs a secret. They even contain codes not owned by the company (third party code) so seeing the sources will be a legal disaster. Do you still think they will like it that the code gets disassembled on-the-fly? I think their lawyers won't even notice that (as long as there is no crash) the disassembled code won't be shown to the users, they just read "disassemble" and cry: No!

    //EDIT: Also, what will happen if the UVD part of fglrx crashes Bridgemans PC? He will have disassembled, copyrighted UVD code at his screen... Will he ever be allowed to even think about implementing UVD into the FOSS driver again?
    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    1. How old are olly and softice? Any "tragedies" since then? If someone really wanted to, he would already have ripped everything away. You donīt need linux kernel disassembler for that. Actually, I think amd and nvidia rip periodically parts of each other.

    2. (EDIT) If they put debugging symbols etc that would be their problem. And I donīt think Bridgeman uses linux, eitherway he is not forced to it.

    "Will he ever be allowed to even think about"
    I never knew AMD censors his brains.
    Since Bridgman is a part of AMD and AMD are the license holder, they can do anything they want with the source code (and the disassembled code) as long as it complies with company policies, legal department and so on.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crazycheese View Post
    If they put debugging symbols etc that would be their problem. And I donīt think Bridgeman uses linux, eitherway he is not forced to it.
    I use Linux, but I rarely have time to watch video on any OS other than very occasional testing and all the damn video ads that are showing up everywhere.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •