linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, take4] FUTEX : new PRIVATE futexes

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:	Wed, 11 Apr 2007 11:30:17 +0200
From:	Pierre Peiffer <pierre.peiffer@...l.net>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>,
	"Shai Fultheim (Shai@...lex86.org)" <shai@...lex86.org>,
	pravin b shelar <pravin.shelar@...softinc.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, take4] FUTEX : new PRIVATE futexes

Nick Piggin a écrit :
> 
> But... that isn't there in mainline. Why is it in -mm?

This was introduced by lguest code....
I did not follow exaclty why.

Pierre

> At any rate, that 
> makes
> it a no brainer to change.
> 
>>
>> As this external thing certainly is not doing the check itself, to be 
>> on the safe side we should enforce it in get_futex_key(). I agree with 
>> you : If we want to maximize performance, we could say : The check 
>> *must* be done by the caller.
> 
> Well we _control_ the API, so let's make it as clean and performant as 
> possible
> from the start.
> 

-- 
Pierre Peiffer
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/