linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] s390 updates for 2.6.28-rc1

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20081024113724.GA21375@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:37:24 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	lethal@...ux-sh.org, paulus@...ba.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] s390 updates for 2.6.28-rc1


* Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> wrote:

> The s390 vdso preparation patch "arch_setup_additional_pages argument" 
> touches other architectures (x86, sh and powerpc):
> 
> arch_setup_additional_pages currently gets two arguments, the binary 
> format descripton and an indication if the process uses an executable 
> stack or not. The second argument is not used by anybody, it could be 
> removed without replacement.

hm, this is the first time i've seen this change, and it looks a bit 
weird:

--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/elf.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/elf.h
@@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ struct linux_binprm;

 #define ARCH_HAS_SETUP_ADDITIONAL_PAGES 1
 extern int arch_setup_additional_pages(struct linux_binprm *bprm,
-                                      int executable_stack);
+                                      int uses_interp);

why didnt you just add a new uses_interp argument?

executable_stack is passed in to potentially enable architectures to be 
aware of how conservative/legacy the address-space of the binary is - 
whether to randomize the vdso, etc. exec-shield used to take advantage 
of that.

But there seems to be no in-tree use of that (and if one arises it can 
just add back that parameter), and i dont want to stand in the way of 
your pull request either, so for the x86 bits:

 Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>

	Ingo
--
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/