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  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]
Date:   Mon, 15 Jul 2019 13:07:19 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Thomas Hellström (VMware) 
        <thomas@...pmail.org>
Cc:     Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: drm pull for v5.3-rc1

On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 12:36 PM Thomas Hellström (VMware)
<thomas@...pmail.org> wrote:
>
> - I've never had any kernel code more reviewed than this.

Hmm. It may have been reviewed, but that wasn't visible in the commits
themselves, so when I look at the pull request, I don't see that.

> - The combined callback / argument struct: It was strongly inspired by
> the struct mm_walk (mm.h), the page walk code being quite similar in
> functionality.

The mm_walk struct is indeed a bit similar, and is in fact a bit
problematic exactly because it mixes function pointers with non-const
data.

I wish it had been a 'const struct mm_walk *" that only passed in the
stuff that describes what to do on the walk itself.  Or separated into
two different pointers - one for the "this is what to do for the walk"
and one for "this is the walking data".

In fact, I think tight now that is actually _almost_ the case and we
could make them const, except for "walk->vma" which is updated
dynamically as we walk.  Oh well.

And for all I know, some of the walkers may be modifying their
"private" field too, since that's left to the walkers.

So yes, that one also has some problems, I agree.

               Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists