linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: Make cpu_tss available to external modules

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 5 May 2015 06:59:05 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Marc Dionne <marc.c.dionne@...il.com>
Cc:	Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...r-file-system.com>,
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Make cpu_tss available to external modules

On May 4, 2015 11:46 PM, "Marc Dionne" <marc.c.dionne@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Commit 75182b1632 ("x86/asm/entry: Switch all C consumers of
> kernel_stack to this_cpu_sp0()") changed current_thread_info
> to use this_cpu_sp0, and indirectly made it rely on init_tss
> which was exported with EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL_GPL.
> As a result some macros and inline functions such as set/get_fs,
> test_thread_flag and variants have been made unusable for
> external modules.

This is okay with me.  I have my doubts as to whether set_fs/get_fs is
a sane interface at all, let alone in non-GPL modules, but both it and
cond_resched (my best guess as to the test_thread_flag offender) have
plenty of historical precedent for non-GPL use, and I didn't intend to
break that.

Acked-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/