linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 02/21] x86/fpu/xstate: Modify state copy helpers to handle both static and dynamic buffers

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]

Date:   Tue, 19 Jan 2021 18:50:52 +0000
From:   "Bae, Chang Seok" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
CC:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "Liu, Jing2" <jing2.liu@...el.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/21] x86/fpu/xstate: Modify state copy helpers to
 handle both static and dynamic buffers

On Jan 15, 2021, at 04:50, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 07:56:58AM -0800, Chang S. Bae wrote:
>> 
>> -void copy_xstate_to_kernel(struct membuf to, struct xregs_state *xsave);
>> -int copy_kernel_to_xstate(struct xregs_state *xsave, const void *kbuf);
>> -int copy_user_to_xstate(struct xregs_state *xsave, const void __user *ubuf);
>> -void copy_supervisor_to_kernel(struct xregs_state *xsave);
>> +void copy_xstate_to_kernel(struct membuf to, struct fpu *fpu);
>> +int copy_kernel_to_xstate(struct fpu *fpu, const void *kbuf);
>> +int copy_user_to_xstate(struct fpu *fpu, const void __user *ubuf);
>> +void copy_supervisor_to_kernel(struct fpu *fpu);
> 
> Hmm, so those functions have "xstate" in the name because they took and
> @xstate parameter. I guess not such a big deal you changing them, just
> pointing out what the naming logic was.

I will add a sentence like this if looks fine:

"The copy functions used to have ‘xstate' in the name as they took a struct
xregs_state * pointer."

Thanks,
Chang