linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the amdgpu tree

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]

Message-ID: <XrjqMK5E95uVkQJ-wCjostUwiUD_39UdfIJzQhmnSwZO3aStGYHAxf9QsACe2WZ6vUn08BoW5X5Ya-tazSy0Iwn2jLLrCQDKxlJ6uWXLGaA=@emersion.fr>
Date:   Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:49:44 +0000
From:   Simon Ser <contact@...rsion.fr>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the amdgpu tree

On Monday, October 11th, 2021 at 09:43, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 07:39:52AM +0000, Simon Ser wrote:
> > I don't understand. Can you elaborate why you think this commit is
> > "utter crap"?
>
> A kernel driver has absolutely no business making decissions based
> on current->comm, which can be changed by any userspace process.  This
> is kernel programming 101.
>
> Independent of that a check for a specific program as the callers makes
> no sense whatsoever as a given program and change over time.  This is
> not even something kernel specific but something that ever software
> engineer should do.

Have you heard about the kernel no-regression rule? Here, we can't enable a new
feature because that would regress user-space which mis-uses the kernel uAPI.

This isn't unheard of. Core drm already detects Xorg with current->comm, and
force-disables atomic KMS.

> > I'd also appreciate if you could be a bit less aggressive. There's
> > nothing "obvious" about this from my point of view.
>
> I'm not agressive.  I'm just really disappointed by the amoubt of crap
> that gets shovelled into the kernel and even more disappointed by the
> abslutely lack of knowledge of some of the contributors.

If your reply wasn't aggressive, I don't know what it is.