linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/17] prmem: shorthands for write rare on common types

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 29 Oct 2018 20:12:32 +0200
From:   Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@...il.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     igor.stoppa@...wei.com, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/17] prmem: shorthands for write rare on common types



On 25/10/2018 01:28, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 10/23/18 2:34 PM, Igor Stoppa wrote:
>> Wrappers around the basic write rare functionality, addressing several
>> common data types found in the kernel, allowing to specify the new
>> values through immediates, like constants and defines.
> 
> I have to wonder whether this is the right way, or whether a
> size-agnostic function like put_user() is the right way.  put_user() is
> certainly easier to use.

I definitely did not like it either.
But it was the best that came to my mind ...
The main purpose of this code was to show what I wanted to do.
Once more, thanks for pointing out a better way to do it.

--
igor