linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv5 05/19] mm/page_alloc: Handle allocation for encrypted memory

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 26 Jul 2018 16:25:04 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 05/19] mm/page_alloc: Handle allocation for encrypted
 memory

On Thu 19-07-18 11:27:24, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 04:03:53PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > I asked about this before and it still isn't covered in the description:
> > You were specifically asked (maybe in person at LSF/MM?) not to modify
> > allocator to pass the keyid around.  Please specifically mention how
> > this design addresses that feedback in the patch description.
> > 
> > You were told, "don't change the core allocator", so I think you just
> > added new functions that wrap the core allocator and called them from
> > the majority of sites that call into the core allocator.  Personally, I
> > think that misses the point of the original request.
> > 
> > Do I have a better way?  Nope, not really.
> 
> +Michal.
> 
> IIRC, Michal was not happy that I propagate the KeyID to very core
> allcoator and we've talked about wrappers around existing APIs as a better
> solution.
> 
> Michal, is it correct?

Yes that is the case. I haven't seen this series and unlikely will get
to it in upcoming days though so I cannot comment much more
unfortunately.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs