linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] fork cleanup for v5.9

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

Date:   Wed, 5 Aug 2020 17:29:02 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] fork cleanup for v5.9

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 05:17:08PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 09:31:28AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 01:28:01PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > > High-level this does two main things:
> > > 1. Remove the double export of both do_fork() and _do_fork() where do_fork()
> > >    used the incosistent legacy clone calling convention. Now we only export
> > >    _do_fork() which is based on struct kernel_clone_args.
> > 
> > Can we retire the _do_fork name as well please?  For one we really don't
> > use single underscore prefix in the kernel, and we also try to avoid our
> > normal __ prefixes if there is no non-prefixed vesion.  Also the name
> > feels wrong, as this implements all of clone and not just fork.
> > What about kernel_clone to match the name of the args structure?
> 
> Yep, sounds good. I actually had a patch for that but it introduced a
> lot of jitter into the series because there's quite a few odd places
> where _do_fork() is used.

In other words: I'll send a patch soon.

Christian