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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 20:54:46 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Cc: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, René Nyffenegger <mail@...enyffenegger.ch>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>, Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@...tuozzo.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/4] x86/syscalls: Specific usage of verify_pre_usermode_state On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 11:27:07AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Finally, I can't really believe I'm the only person for whom "Specific > usage of verity_pre_usermode_state" is completely opaque. No, you're not. I'm missing the usual layout of the commit message "Problem is A, we need to do B, because of C." And this particular one needs to be pretty verbose as it is tricky lowlevel, userspace return blabla code and I'd prefer not to have to rhyme up together myself what's going on and what we're fixing here. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists