linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] modules fix incorrect percpu usage

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4BB2B055.1020807@kernel.org>
Date:	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:15:49 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	rostedt@...dmis.org
CC:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, stable <stable@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] modules fix incorrect percpu usage

On 03/31/2010 11:03 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I don't know. A possible "NULL pointer dereference" seems to me to be a
> pretty big user visible impact.
> 
> I guess the question is, what's the risk of adding this change?

AFAICS, the risk is fairly low.  per_cpu_ptr(pcpudest, cpu) is
SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR((ptr), per_cpu_offset((cpu))) which is just a fancy
way of saying "typeof(ptr)((unsigned long)(ptr) + per_cpu_offset(cpu))"
with enough obfuscation to prevent gcc from optimizing it incorrectly.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/