linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mm, slub: change run-time assertion in kmalloc

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, 18 May 2021 10:53:41 +0900
From:   Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, rientjes@...gle.com, penberg@...nel.org,
        cl@...ux.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        naresh.kamboju@...aro.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au, arnd@...db.de,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm, slub: change run-time assertion in
 kmalloc_index() to compile-time

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 05:43:22PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Ah sorry, that should definitely be >= :(
>
> That is what I get for writing an email that late... in reality, it probably
> won't matter due to the availability of 11.0.1 and 11.1.0 but it should
> absolutely be changed.

> I have not given Nick's patch a go yet but would something like this be
> acceptable? If so, did you want me to send a formal fixup patch or did you
> want to send a v4? I have no personal preference.

I think fixup patch patch will be better as we can undo it later.
I don't think Nick's patch is needed because that code is not related with
clang version, and we don't need that code even in clang 10.

then is there something I can help for now?

thanks,
Hyeonggon