linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] vt: get rid of worst cases of __put_user/__get

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: <20170605061350.GR6365@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 5 Jun 2017 07:13:50 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Adam Borowski <kilobyte@...band.pl>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] vt: get rid of worst cases of __put_user/__get_user

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 12:42:52AM +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 03, 2017 at 09:32:55AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Hi!
> > In a recent discussion, Linus and Al Viro said quite a bit of expletives
> > about __put_user() and __get_user(), that it's a bad interface that's
> > almost always the wrong thing to use:
> > https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=149463725626316&w=2
> > https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=149465866929092&w=2
> > 
> > Here's a few patches applying the lessons from that discussion to vt.
> > None of the uses is performance-critical, but at least we get a nice bit
> > of code simplification.  And, it's a start of manual review + conversion
> > that Al Viro wants.
> 
> Ah, nice work, at first glance these all look good to me.  I'll queue
> them up on Monday.

Could you put that into a separate no-rebase branch?  Or I could do that
in vfs.git, for that matter...