linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/9] kernel: Support TIF_SYSCALL

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 10:00:21 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>
Cc:     luto@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, willy@...radead.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
        kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/9] kernel: Support TIF_SYSCALL_INTERCEPT flag

On Wed, Sep 23 2020 at 13:49, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 04:18:26PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
>> Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> writes:
>> Yes, we can, and I'm happy to follow up with that as part of my TIF
>> clean up work, but can we not block the current patchset to be merged
>> waiting for that, as this already grew a lot from the original feature
>> submission?
>
> In that case, I'd say just add the new TIF flag. The consolidation can
> come later.

No. This is exactly the wrong order. Cleanup and consolidation have
precedence over features. I'm tired of 'we'll do that later' songs,
simply because in the very end I'm going to be the idiot who mops up the
resulting mess.

Thanks,

        tglx