linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 0/7] Syscall User Dispatch

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]

Message-ID: <CALCETrUh=+=3tYQQTC+Fsakx5xmzQmN_BfzQ7nwY=1GBwoGDNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 16:04:59 -0800
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Paul Gofman <gofmanp@...il.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/7] Syscall User Dispatch

On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:32 AM Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
<krisman@...labora.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This is v8 of syscall user dispatch.  Last version got some acks but
> there was one small documentation fix I wanted to do, as requested by
> Florian.  This also addresses the commit message fixup Peter requested.
>
> The only actual code change from v7 is solving a trivial merge conflict
> I myself created with the entry code fixup I made week and with
> something else in the TIP tree.
>
> I also shared this with glibc and there wasn't any complaints other than
> the matter about user-notif vs. siginfo, which was discussed in v7 and
> the understanding is that it is not necessary now and can be added
> later, if needed, on the same infrastructure without a new api.
>
> I'm not sure about TIP the rules, but is it too late to be queued for
> the next merge window?  I'd love to have this in 5.11 if possible, since
> it has been flying for quite a while.
>

Other than my little nitpick about on_syscall_dispatch(), the whole series is:

Reviewed-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>