linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [v2] mm/ksm: Fix NULL pointer dereference when KSM zero page is enabled

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMZfGtX1wPY=B30Rroj4kDhfU43G0jO8T9CeR3AzjGAD6=nGTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 22:39:55 +0800
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     Xiongchun Duan <duanxiongchun@...edance.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [v2] mm/ksm: Fix NULL pointer dereference when KSM
 zero page is enabled

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 10:17 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> wrote:
>
> >>> to crash when we access vma->vm_mm(its offset is 0x40) later in
> >>
> >> Will another fine-tuning become relevant also for this wording?
> >
> > Sorry, I don't understand what this means because of my poor English.
>
> Our language knowledge can evolve over time.
>
>
> > Could you explain it again.
>
> You integrated a few of my suggestions into your message selection. - Thanks.
> I wonder why you did not like the following small adjustment possibilities
> so far.
>
>   to a crash … vm_mm (its …
>

Thanks a lot. I will fix it.

>
> >> Will any other tags become helpful in such a case?
> >
> > How about changing
> >     "following calltrace is captured in kernel 4.19 with KSM zero page"
> > to
> >    "The following calltrace is captured with the following patch applied:
> >        e86c59b1b12d ("mm/ksm: improve deduplication of zero pages with
> > colouring")
> >     "
> > ?
>
> I find it unlikely that such a wording alternative would be more appropriate
> while I became just curious for related development consequences around
> the usage of a longterm kernel version.
>
> Would you like to reuse the term “call trace”?
>

OK, I will reuse the “call trace”. Thanks again.

Anyone else have any suggestions? If not, I will post another v4 version
to fix the commit message that Markus mentioned.

-- 
Yours,
Muchun