[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5127C62D-E97D-40B0-85B3-16F30B7ED514@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2019 09:10:38 -0800
From: hpa@...or.com
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>, valentin.schneider@....com,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/20] objtool: Add UACCESS validation
On March 7, 2019 8:33:26 AM PST, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 3:52 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
>wrote:
>>
>> XXX: are we sure we want __memset marked AC-safe?
>
>It's certainly one of the safer functions to call with AC set, but it
>sounds wrong anyway. It's not like it's likely to leak kernel data
>(most memset's are with 0, and even the non-zero ones I can't imagine
>are sensitive - more like poison values etc).
>
>What's the call site that made you go "just add __memset() to the
>list"?
>
> Linus
Agreed... it seems fishy at least.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists