linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/boot: Avoid redundant address overlap tests in memcpy().

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 24 Jan 2022 23:48:17 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.co.jp>
Cc:     dave.hansen@...el.com, benh@...zon.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, kuni1840@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/boot: Avoid redundant address overlap tests in
 memcpy().

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 07:14:47AM +0900, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> > Also, is this worth the churn?  It probably saves less than 10 
> > instructions, all of which are ridiculously cheap.  Is there a *reason* 
> > for this other than being a pure cleanup?
> 
> This is just for cleanup.

Was wondering the same thing, whether this is even worth the trouble.
I'm sure you can find real bugs to fix.

:-)

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette