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 13:01:59 -0700
From:   Scott Bauer <scott.bauer@...el.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
Cc:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        "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

e0;136;0csOn Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 11:24:58AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 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.
>

Thanks for the clarification, Jens.
In that case I'd like to keep the ABI fixup in patch one and the dynamic allocation
in patch 2.
I'd like to wait for Christoph's blessing as well before you take it.

Thanks