linux-kernel - Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

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+8MBbKVJ030N4fJ=jzXaMoEePV4v0PVAs_OJ0p9Lg+VTJDeLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Apr 2017 11:44:23 -0700
From:   Tony Luck <tony.luck@...il.com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     "linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> ... and sure enough, on generic kernel (CONFIG_ITANIUM) that yields a nice
> shiny oops at precisely that insn.

The right fix here might be to delete all the CONFIG_ITANIUM paths. I
doubt that anyone is still running upstream kernels on Merced CPUs
(and if they are, it might be a kindness to them to make them stop).

> We really need tests for uaccess primitives.  That's not a recent regression,
> BTW - it had been that way since 2.3.48-pre2, as far as I can see.

Probably be handy for new architectures to test all the corner cases.

-Tony