linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: uaccess: Implement strict user copy checks

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]

Message-ID: <20100810225519.GF7702@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Tue, 10 Aug 2010 23:55:19 +0100
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: uaccess: Implement strict user copy checks

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 03:46:59PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 08/03/2010 08:02 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> This is mostly a copy from the s390 implementation (which copied
>> from x86 and sparc), except we print a warning if the Kconfig
>> option is disabled.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
>>
>
> Ping?
>
> Should I submit this to the patch system?

Unfortunately, there's quite a dearth of information on this patch,
so I can't say.  I think it needs some testing before a decision can
be made.

What compilers have been tested with this?

As the help comments intimate that it needs at least gcc 4.4, and
you've changed it to produce a compile time warning if the option is
disabled, what's the implications for older compilers?
--
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/