linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/8] binfmt_elf: open code copy_siginfo_to

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: <20200415074514.GA1393@lst.de>
Date:   Wed, 15 Apr 2020 09:45:14 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] binfmt_elf: open code copy_siginfo_to_user to
 kernelspace buffer

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:15:09PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I don't think you are changing the behavior here, but I still wonder if it
> is in fact correct for x32: is in_x32_syscall() true here when dumping an
> x32 compat elf process, or should this rather be set according to which
> binfmt_elf copy is being used?

The infrastructure cold enable that, although it would require more
arch hooks I think.  I'd rather keep it out of this series and to
an interested party.  Then again x32 doesn't seem to have a whole lot
of interested parties..