linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][v6][PATCH 0/9] clone_with

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: <20090912171930.GB29169@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:19:30 -0700
From:	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	mikew@...gle.com, mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com,
	Nathan Lynch <nathanl@...tin.ibm.com>, container@...ibm.com,
	sukadev@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][v6][PATCH 0/9] clone_with_pids() syscall

Peter Zijlstra [peterz@...radead.org] wrote:
| On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 09:47 -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
| > | Also, if you're passing a struct, why not put nr_pids in there, and
| > | replace clone_pid_struct with a simple array? That would give us
| > | 
| > | struct clone_struct {
| > |         u64 flags;
| > |         u64 child_stack;
| > |         u32 child_tid;
| > |         u32 parent_tid;

BTW, these two tids are __user pointers that kernel copies data into.
They should be u64 to avoid conversions in architecture specific code ?

| > | 	u32 nr_pids;
| > | 	u32 reserved1;
| > | 	u64 reserved2;
| > | };
| > | 
| > | int clone2(struct clone_struct *cs, pid_t *pids);
| > 
| > My only concern with this approach was the extra copy_from_user() in the
| > common case (i.e when not using the extended features).  I assume the
| > overhead of copy_from_user() is small enough to be ignored ?
| 
| I would think so, esp for small structure, it would be a cache hot copy.
| That is, for x86 I doubt it'll show up. No idea what hoops other arch
| have to jump through to get copy_from_user() doing what it does.
--
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/