linux-kernel - Re: Sed-opal fixups

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, 9 Feb 2017 11:24:58 -0700
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
To:     Scott Bauer <scott.bauer@...el.com>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
CC:     "keith.busch@...el.com" <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "jonathan.derrick@...el.com" <jonathan.derrick@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Sed-opal fixups

On 02/09/2017 10:45 AM, Scott Bauer wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:43:20PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
>> From: Scott Bauer
>>> Sent: 09 February 2017 17:20
>>> It may be too late to change anyhting in the uapi header. When we
>>> switched over to using IOC_SIZE I found a bug where I had switched
>>> up a structure in one of the series from v4 to v5 but never changed
>>> the structure in the IOW. The structure that was in there was to small
>>> so when we kzalloc on it we don't request enough space. It worked before
>>> because we were using the cmd strictly as a command #, not using the IOC
>>> and friends.
>>>
>>> If it's too late to modify that IOW, I can work around it by reallocing
>>> on the correct size for that command only. I verified the rest of the
>>> commands and the structures are the same.
>>>
>>> Let me know what you think, please.
>>
>> Maybe define IOC_OPAL_ACTIVATE_LSP_OLD to the incorrect value and
>> IOC_OPAL_ACTIVATE_LSP to the correct one.
>> But that relies on any users specifying the correct structure.
>> I wouldn't guarantee that.
> 
> I think I'm the only userspace user right now, this went in on monday,
> so I can can change my tooling easily. I just wasnt sure if there was a
> set time where the user ABI cannot be changed.

We can still change it, and we definitely should if it improves the
interface. It's not a ABI until it's in a released, final kernel.

-- 
Jens Axboe