linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] Improve stability of system clock

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: <20170517172220.GB19423@localhost>
Date:   Wed, 17 May 2017 19:22:20 +0200
From:   Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>
To:     John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc:     lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] Improve stability of system clock

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 10:02:00AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 09:30:31AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >> Could you submit your linux-tktest infrastructure to the kselftests dir?
> >
> > I can, but it's a mess that breaks frequently as the timekeeping and
> > other kernel code changes. Are you sure you want that in the kernel
> > tree? :)
> 
> Being a mess is a slight concern, but as for breaking, if its
> in-kernel, then folks can't make changes that break it, right?

It duplicates/stubs quite a few kernel functions that are needed to
compile and link the timekeeping.c file into an executable. See
linux-tktest/missing.c. If their signature changes, or new functions
are needed, it will break.

Is there a better way to run the timekeeping code in an userspace
application? I suspect it would need something like the Linux Kernel
Library project.

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar