linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] android: binder: support for domains and scatter-gather.

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:   Thu, 2 Feb 2017 20:56:04 -0800
From:   John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] android: binder: support for domains and scatter-gather.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com> wrote:
> Android userspace will start using binder IPC for communication with HAL
> modules. To clearly separate this IPC domain from the existing framework
> IPC domain, this patch series adds support for multiple "binder domains".
> This is implemented by each domain having its own binder context manager,
> and then having a separate device node per domain.
>
> The other change introduced by this series is scatter-gather; currently
> all objects passed through binder IPC must be serialized in userspace, with
> with the exception of binder objects and file descriptors. By adding scatter-
> gather support for memory buffers, we can avoid the serialization copy,
> thereby increasing performance for larger transaction sizes.
>
> The two patches from Arve are security patches that we've already applied
> in android-common. I included them in front of the series because my changes
> touch quite some of that code.

Hey Greg,
   Curious what the status of these patches are? Did you have any
outstanding objection, or were you just waiting for them to be resent?

AOSP is now making use of this feature, so mainline kernels have
trouble booting w/o it, so it would be good to get merged. :)

thanks
-john