linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/14] x86/fpu: Remove 'kbuf' parameter from the copy_xstate_to

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]

Date:   Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:45:21 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] x86/fpu: Remove 'kbuf' parameter from the
 copy_xstate_to_user() APIs

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:57:28AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Would anyone object to using u32 in these prototypes?

Well, would there be any disadvantage to forcing them to u32?
Potentially by something else wanting to use those interfaces besides
the regset thing and that something else doesn't like u32s?

Otherwise, I don't see a problem.

I mean, if 4G are not enough for xstate dimensions then we have a whole
different problem.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.