linux-kernel - Re: add file system helpers that take kernel pointers for the init code v4

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: <20200731021424.GG1236603@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 31 Jul 2020 03:14:24 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: add file system helpers that take kernel pointers for the init
 code v4

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 08:25:24AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 08:51:17PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 06:33:53PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Hi Al and Linus,
> > > 
> > > currently a lot of the file system calls in the early in code (and the
> > > devtmpfs kthread) rely on the implicit set_fs(KERNEL_DS) during boot.
> > > This is one of the few last remaining places we need to deal with to kill
> > > off set_fs entirely, so this series adds new helpers that take kernel
> > > pointers.  These helpers are in init/ and marked __init and thus will
> > > be discarded after bootup.  A few also need to be duplicated in devtmpfs,
> > > though unfortunately.
> > >
> > > The series sits on top of my previous
> > > 
> > >   "decruft the early init / initrd / initramfs code v2"
> > 
> > Could you fold the fixes in the parent branch to avoid the bisect hazards?
> > As it is, you have e.g. "initd: pass a non-f_pos offset to kernel_read/kernel_write"
> > that ought to go into "initrd: switch initrd loading to struct file based APIs"...
> 
> I'm not a huge fan of rebasing after it has been out for a long time and
> with pending other patches on top of it.  But at your request I've now
> folded the fixes and force pushed it.

Um...

Christoph Hellwig (28):
[snip]
      initramfs: switch initramfs unpacking to struct file based APIs
      initramfs: switch initramfs unpacking to struct file based APIs
[snip]

It's not a bisect hazard, of course, but if you don't fold those
together, you might at least want to give the second one a different
commit summary...  I hadn't been able to find an analogue of #init_path on
top of that either.

As it is, #init-user-pointers is fine (aside of that SNAFU with unfolded
pair of commits), and so's the contents of #init_path part following what
used to be #init-user-pointers, but it'll be an awful mess on merge in
the current shape.

I can sort it out myself, if you don't mind that; again, I'm OK with
the contents and I've no problem with doing reordering/folding.