linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] mempolicy memory corruption fixlet

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: <CA+55aFzoVQ29C-AZYx=G62LErK+7HuTCpZhvovoyS0_KTGGZQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 May 2012 11:26:41 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	kosaki.motohiro@...il.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...gle.com>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, hughd@...gle.com,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mempolicy memory corruption fixlet

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:02 AM,  <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> wrote:
>
> So, I think we should reconsider about shared mempolicy completely.

Quite frankly, I'd prefer that approach. The code is subtle and
horribly bug-fraught, and I absolutely detest the way it looks too.
Reading your patches was actually somewhat painful.

If we could just remove the support for it entirely, that would be
*much* preferable to continue working with this code.

Could we just try that removal, and see if anybody screams?

                  Linus
--
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/