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  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]
Date:	Tue, 16 Sep 2014 15:06:51 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <>
To:	David Miller <>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Andy Lutomirski <>,
	Daniel Borkmann <>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <>,
	Chema Gonzalez <>,
	Eric Dumazet <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Pablo Neira Ayuso <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Kees Cook <>,
	Linux API <>,
	Network Development <>,
	LKML <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 net-next 03/11] bpf: add lookup/update/delete/iterate
 methods to BPF maps

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 2:49 PM, David Miller <> wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <>
> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 14:23:27 -0700
>> no compat layer and type checking will be done
>> by syscall wrappers. Ok?
> Why are you against using strong typing just for everything other
> than the user pointer blobs?
> I don't understand the resistence to my suggestion to just use
> aligned_u64 instead of "void __user *" in the union members.

All these different variants are ok to me. There are pros and
cons to either approach. I'm not against strong typing.
I just thought it would be cleaner not to use 'union' and
was asking for opinion. That's all. Sure, I will keep 'union'
and only change pointers to __aligned_u64.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists