linux-kernel - [off-list] a path toward killing thread

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 17 Jun 2016 15:41:49 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: [off-list] a path toward killing thread_info

https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git/commit/?h=x86/vmap_stack&id=50d6cef284e80678c2065813b54bf525d1202d0f

It's fairly straightforward, it's arguably a cleanup, and, with it
applied, there are very few references to 'thread_info' left in the
core kernel at all.

PeterZ, I'm thinking of adding task_ti_flags_ptr to directly find the
ti flags word given a task_struct * so the scheduler can use it.  Does
that seem reasonable to you?

Ingo, lockdep tracks mutex owners by thread_info *.  Is there any good
reason for this?  Can I just use task_struct *?  If we do that, I
think thread_info will be *gone* from the core.

--Andy

-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC