linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/36] remove in-kernel syscall invocations (part 1)

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, 16 Mar 2018 01:54:23 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/36] remove in-kernel syscall invocations (part 1)

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 05:54:27PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Yes. And honestly, I'd rather have these kinds of "just change the
> calling convention" almost automated patches separately - and then the
> cleanups later.
> 
> Mixing the calling convention change and the cleanup together is just
> confusing and potentially causes subtle issues.

A lot of the issues here is that the initramfs / do_mount code
is written as if it was user space code, but in kernel space.  E.g.
using file desriptors etc.  I think doing one or a few patches
before this series to sort this out would really reduce the scope
of work and be the right thing.  For any additional minor cleanups
I agree that it might make sense to postpone them.