linux-kernel - Re: syscall_get_error() && TS

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: <CA+55aFx_K58D10-J81PgDZnNcZATMDVL2k_8WJjAfb_EFiAsKw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:16:36 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@...hat.com>,
        Pedro Alves <palves@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: syscall_get_error() && TS_ checks

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Oh, I agree, and let me repeat the 3rd time that I suggest to kill this
> helper and use syscall_get_return_value() in arch/x86/kernel/signal.c,
> it has no other callers.

That is probably fine, I'm just arguing against the suggested changes
to syscall_get_error().

That said, I'm not sure why you want to change this in the first
place? I think the current syscall_get_error() - with explicit compat
handling and all - is fine.

But if the aim is to just remove syscall_get_error() entirely because
it's so unused, then I'm ok with that.

                      Linus