[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150930090620.GC6033@pd.tnic>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:06:20 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
Wolfram Gloger <wmglo@...t.med.uni-muenchen.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] x86/process: Sanitize bound checks in get_wchan()
and unify 32/64 bit
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 08:38:21AM -0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> As reported by several people the bound checks in get_wchan() on x86/64bit
> are wrong.
>
> The following series addresses that problem and as a consequence
> unifies the needlessly different implementations of 32 and 64 bit.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
> ---
> process.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> process_32.c | 28 ----------------------------
> process_64.c | 24 ------------------------
> 3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
Hohumm, looks good to me. Especially the documentation of the stack
layout and why we're doing all that dance.
Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Should we CC: stable?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists