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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 17 May 2022 10:35:44 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <>
Cc:     Christophe de Dinechin <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
        Juri Lelli <>,
        Vincent Guittot <>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <>,
        Steven Rostedt <>,
        Ben Segall <>, Mel Gorman <>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] sched/core: Address classes via __begin_sched_classes

On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 01:46:54PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 08:33:25PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > I just need to start today over.
> :-)
> Also, even with this sorted, there's a ton array bound things left.
> Please don't just mangle the code until it stops complaining like in the
> previous postings of these patches.

Yeah, other code is much simpler. The sched code has been a bit tricky
to figure out.

> As such, I'm only barely ok with the below patch. Ideally I'd shoot GCC
> in the head. Its *really* tedious you cannot just tell it to shut up
> already.

What you've got below is almost exactly what I had in my first attempt
at this (that I never posted). What I was missing and couldn't track
down were the places you used sched_class_above(). I should have sent
_that_ patch and asked where the comparisons were that I couldn't find.
I think what you've got is much cleaner, as it makes the for loop use
the normal iterator idiom.

Thank you!

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <>

Kees Cook

Powered by blists - more mailing lists