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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 15 Mar 2021 10:28:23 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] mm: Restore init_on_* static branch defaults

On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 03:56:02PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue,  9 Mar 2021 13:42:55 -0800 Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> 
> > Choosing the initial state of static branches changes the assembly layout
> > (if the condition is expected to be likely, inline, or unlikely, out of
> > line via a jump). The _TRUE/_FALSE defines for CONFIG_INIT_ON_*_DEFAULT_ON
> > were accidentally removed. These need to stay so that the CONFIG controls
> > the pessimization of the resulting static branch NOP/JMP locations.
> 
> Changelog doesn't really explain why anyone would want to apply this
> patch.  This is especially important for -stable patches.
> 
> IOW, what is the user visible effect of the bug?

Yeah, that's a good point, and in writing more details I decided this
wasn't actually worth a stable patch, and should just get folded into
later patches.

Thanks for the sanity-check!

-- 
Kees Cook

Powered by blists - more mailing lists