linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 37/59] x86/putuser: Provide room for padding

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: <YxWiW97HPV6kWjgz@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 5 Sep 2022 09:16:43 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com>,
        Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
        Johannes Wikner <kwikner@...z.ch>,
        Alyssa Milburn <alyssa.milburn@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
        Joao Moreira <joao.moreira@...el.com>,
        Joseph Nuzman <joseph.nuzman@...el.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 37/59] x86/putuser: Provide room for padding

On Sat, Sep 03, 2022 at 10:26:45AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 2:46 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. It doesn't look too horrible, but yeah, fi it still ends up
> > getting the same padding overhead I'm not sure it ends up really
> > mattering.
> 
> Oh, and I think it's buggy anyway.
> 
> If there are any tail-calls to a leaf function, the tracking now gets
> out of whack. So it's no longer a "don't bother counting the last
> level", now it ends up being a "count got off by one".

See validate_sibling_call(), it too calls validate_call().

(Although prehaps I should go s/sibling/tail/ on all that for clarity)