linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] powerpc/64: make buildable without CONFIG

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b3f74049-be82-be3c-5156-69a18010537e@c-s.fr>
Date:   Thu, 29 Aug 2019 10:38:53 +0200
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
        Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>,
        Nicolai Stange <nstange@...e.de>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org>,
        Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Michal Suchanek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] powerpc/64: make buildable without CONFIG_COMPAT



Le 29/08/2019 à 10:01, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:46 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
>>> @@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ static void do_signal(struct task_struct *tsk)
>>>
>>>        rseq_signal_deliver(&ksig, tsk->thread.regs);
>>>
>>> -     if (is32) {
>>> +     if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC32) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMPAT)) && is32) {
>>
>> I think we should fix the is_32bit_task definitions instead so that
>> callers don't need this mess.  I'd suggest something like:
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
>> #define is_32bit_task()         test_thread_flag(TIF_32BIT)
>> #else
>> #define is_32bit_task()         IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC32)
>> #endif
> 
> Are there actually any (correct) uses of is_32bit_task() outside of
> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64?

There is at least  stack_maxrandom_size()
Also  brk_rnd() and do_signal()

Christophe

> 
> I suspect most if not all could be changed to the generic
> in_compat_syscall() that we use outside of architecture specific
> code.
> 
>         Arnd
>