linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] microblaze: remove CONFIG_SET

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: <CAK8P3a22q+vTb3cEurhA0zXzw8-9+jKJRotC0oWMncS3sb-7zA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Feb 2022 21:57:43 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] microblaze: remove CONFIG_SET_FS

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 6:46 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:00 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > I have now uploaded a cleanup series to
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git/log/?h=set_fs
> >
> > This uses the same access_ok() function across almost all
> > architectures, with the exception of those that need something else,
> > and I then I went further and killed off set_fs for everything other
> > than ia64.
>
> Thanks, looks good to me.
>
> Can you say why you didn't convert ia64? I don't see any set_fs() use
> there, except for the unaligned handler, which looks trivial to
> remove. It looks like the only reason for it is kernel-mode unaligned
> exceptions, which we should just turn fatal, I suspect (they already
> get logged).
>
> And ia64 people could make the unaligned handling do the kernel mode
> case in emulate_load/store_int() - it doesn't look *that* painful.
>
> But maybe you noticed something else?
>
> It would be really good to just be able to say that set_fs() no longer
> exists at all.

I had previously gotten stuck at ia64, but gave it another go now
and uploaded an updated branch with ia64 taken care of and another
patch to clean up bits afterwards.

I only gave it light testing so far, mainly building the defconfig for every
architecture. I'll post the series once the build bots are happy with the
branch overall.

         Arnd