linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86, mpx: extend siginfo structure to include bound violation information

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: <20140113104306.GD5388@pd.tnic>
Date:	Mon, 13 Jan 2014 11:43:06 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Ren Qiaowei <qiaowei.ren@...el.com>
Cc:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86, mpx: extend siginfo structure to include bound
 violation information

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 04:22:27PM +0800, Ren Qiaowei wrote:
> >I tried to use generic structure and macro, but many members of generic
> >struct insn are not used for MPX,

I think that's ok - there are a lot of examples in the kernel where only
a subset of the struct members are used by a particular functionality.

> Because only struct insn_field and several macros may be replaced
> with generic version, I guess it maybe be confused easily to include
> generic insn header. What do you think about it?

Yes, I think the idea is to use and, if needed, extend the generic
functionality instead of growing our own here and there for obvious
benefits.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/