linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 PATCH] futex: extend set_robust_list to allow 2 locking ABIs at the same time.

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]

Date:   Tue, 05 Nov 2019 10:48:39 +0100
From:   Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To:     Shawn Landden <shawn@....icu>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH] futex: extend set_robust_list to allow 2 locking ABIs at the same time.

* Shawn Landden:

> If this new ABI is used, then bit 1 of the *next pointer of the
> user-space robust_list indicates that the futex_offset2 value should
> be used in place of the existing futex_offset.

The futex interface currently has some races which can only be fixed by
API changes.  I'm concerned that we sacrifice the last bit for some
rather obscure feature.  What if we need that bit for fixing the
correctness issues?

Thanks,
Florian