linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] x86: switch atomic.h to use atomic-instrumented.h

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:   Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:54:02 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] x86: switch atomic.h to use atomic-instrumented.h


* Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:14:16 +0200 Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Add arch_ prefix to all atomic operations and include
> >> <asm-generic/atomic-instrumented.h>. This will allow
> >> to add KASAN instrumentation to all atomic ops.
> >
> > This gets a large number of (simple) rejects when applied to
> > linux-next.  Can you please redo against -next?
> 
> 
> This is based on tip/locking tree. Ingo already took a part of these
> series. The plan is that he takes the rest, and this applies on
> tip/locking without conflicts.

Yeah, so I've taken the rest as well, it all looks very clean now. Should show up 
in the next -next, if it passes my (arguably limited) testing.

Andrew, is this workflow fine with you? You usually take KASAN patches, but I was 
unhappy with the atomics instrumention of the earlier patches, and ended up 
reviewing the followup variants, and felt that if I hinder a patchset I might as 
well test and apply it once I'm happy with them! ;-)

Should be a special exception for this series only.

Thanks,

	Ingo