linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] kthread: make struct kthread kmalloc'ed

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: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1610282043530.5053@nanos>
Date:   Fri, 28 Oct 2016 20:44:27 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Roman Pen <roman.penyaev@...fitbricks.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kthread: make struct kthread kmalloc'ed

On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> > Be careful with anonymous unions. There are a few pitfalls with older
> > compilers. That's why I said make it a proper union and fixup the 5 usage
> > sites.
> 
> Ah. Then I'd prefer to do this later or in a separate change, unless you
> feel strongly. I certainly do not want to update other users at least right
> now.
> 
> Yes, these 2 type casts do not look nice, but they are hidden in the trivial
> helpers. And, for example, if something goes wrong we can trivially change
> this code to use, say, sas_ss_sp. Just we need to update the comments to
> explain why it is safe too.
> 
> Finally. I still hope we will kill struct kthread (I mean, unbloat it and
> embed into task_struct), and this means that the proper union should touch
> more members. Say, sas_* and/or vfork_done+set/clear_child_tid. I'd like
> to do this only once if possible.

Fair enough.

Thanks,

	tglx