linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] uapi: avoid namespace conflict in linux/posix

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]

Message-ID: <87tvd2j9ye.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 07 Jun 2019 06:28:09 +0200
From:   Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To:     Joseph Myers <joseph@...esourcery.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Paul Burton <pburton@...ecomp.com>,
        Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uapi: avoid namespace conflict in linux/posix_types.h

* Joseph Myers:

> What happened with this patch (posted 19 March)?  I found today that we 
> can't use Linux 5.1 headers in glibc testing because the namespace issues 
> are still present in the headers as of the release.

This regression fix still hasn't been merged into Linus' tree.  What is
going on here?

This might seem rather minor, but the namespace testing is actually
relevant in practice.  It prevents accidental clashes with C/C++
identifiers in user code.

If this fairly central UAPI header is not made namespace-clean again,
then we need to duplicate information from more UAPI headers in glibc,
and I don't think that's something we'd want to do.

Thanks,
Florian