linux-kernel - Re: [stable] [PATCH] x86 ptrace: fix PTRACE

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:	Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:02:22 -0700
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	TAKADA Yoshihito <takada@....nifty.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH] x86 ptrace: fix PTRACE_GETFPXREGS error

On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 04:46:58PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 12:11:04PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > 
> > > * Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > since the original fix is already upstream, i've applied the delta 
> > > > > patch below. Should we still do this for v2.6.26 or can we defer it 
> > > > > to v2.6.27? As ptrace is the only user of this facility for now this 
> > > > > would be an identity transformation AFAICS and the v2.6.26 release 
> > > > > is very close.
> > > > 
> > > > I don't think there's a problem with 2.6.26 either way.  I agree that 
> > > > the user_regset internal API does not matter much before 2.6.27.
> > > 
> > > okay - i've queued it up in tip/x86/ptrace for now.
> > > 
> > > > My patch alone applies to 2.6.25, which is why I CC'd it to stable. I 
> > > > think applying that (and not takada's patch) to stable-2.6.25 would be 
> > > > best.
> > > 
> > > i think Greg already queued the original fix up for v2.6.25, as per the 
> > > commit notifier below.
> > 
> > Yes I did queue that one up, but it looks different from Roland's 
> > original patch in this thread.
> 
> yes, but as discussed in this thread, both patches are fine in principle 
> as far as the regression goes.

Ah, great, sorry I missed that.  I'll leave the current patch in our
tree and go get more coffee :)

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/