| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2023 15:49:51 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: sdf@...gle.com, axboe@...nel.dk, asml.silence@...il.com,
willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, martin.lau@...ux.dev, krisman@...e.de,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] io_uring: Initial support for {s,g}etsockopt
commands
On Mon, 4 Sep 2023 09:24:53 -0700 Breno Leitao wrote:
> Patches 1-2: Modify the BPF hooks to support sockptr_t, so, these functions
> become flexible enough to accept user or kernel pointers for optval/optlen.
Have you seen:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wgGV61xrG=gO0=dXH64o2TDWWrXn1mx-CX885JZ7h84Og@mail.gmail.com/
? I wasn't aware that Linus felt this way, now I wonder if having
sockptr_t spread will raise any red flags as this code flows back
to him.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists