[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190523152118.t22z37mpqfwjjtkw@mbp>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 16:21:19 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: enh <enh@...gle.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
Alexander Deucher <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
Christian Koenig <Christian.Koenig@....com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Lee Smith <Lee.Smith@....com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@....com>,
Jacob Bramley <Jacob.Bramley@....com>,
Ruben Ayrapetyan <Ruben.Ayrapetyan@....com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 09:58:22AM -0700, enh wrote:
> i was questioning the argument about the ioctl issues, and saying that
> from my perspective, untagging bugs are not really any different than
> any other kind of kernel bug.
Once this series gets in, they are indeed just kernel bugs. What I want
is an easier way to identify them, ideally before they trigger in the
field.
> i still don't see how this isn't just a regular testing/CI issue, the
> same as any other kind of kernel bug. it's already the case that i can
> get a bad kernel...
The testing would have a smaller code coverage in terms of drivers,
filesystems than something like a static checker (though one does not
exclude the other).
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists