linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.15 118/124] signal/parisc: Document a conflict with SI

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]

Date:   Wed, 21 Mar 2018 19:58:20 +0000
From:   Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
        Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
        "linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.15 118/124] signal/parisc: Document a
 conflict with SI_USER with SIGFPE

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 02:49:25PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com> writes:
>
>> Hey Eric,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:20:21AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com> writes:
>>>
>>>What is the justification for backporting this and the other similar
>>>Documentation commits?
>>
>> It was flagged as a bug fixing patch by a new process we're testing, and
>> when I looked at it I thought that the commit message suggests it fixes
>> an ABI issue.
>
>Unfortunately they just reveal an ABI issue.  I believe there are some
>fixes coming but given that the issues are a decade old in many cases
>actually fixing these things must be approach with care so as not to
>create regressions.

I've removed these commits.

>>>These commits just introduce a define _FIXME with value of 0, to
>>>document that the userspace ABI was handled incorrectly long ago.
>>>
>>>These commits do not fix anything.  Thes commits do not change anything
>>>except a little how they are handled in siginfo_layout.  And I don't see
>>>the changes that introduce siginfo_layout in kernel/signal.c being
>>>backported.
>>>
>>>Further these commits don't even have a fixes tag so I am curious
>>>what is triggering them for backport.
>>
>> We're testing out a new mechanism where we train a neural network to
>> detect bug fixing patches and flag them for manual review. We're working
>> on a FAQ + more detailed information right now.
>
>The neural network did seem to pick up on something that is worth
>looking at.

Indeed, and we use review input to retrain the NN on these commits.
Thank you!

-- 

Thanks,
Sasha