linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] tools/nolibc: fork: fix on s390 and add test

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: <ZDuIlQ4mR9Ic116I@1wt.eu>
Date:   Sun, 16 Apr 2023 07:33:09 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
Cc:     Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] tools/nolibc: fork: fix on s390 and add test

Hi Thomas,

On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 11:28:46PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> The generic fork() implementation in nolibc falls back to the clone()
> syscall. On s390 the first two arguments to clone() are swapped compared
> to other architectures, breaking the implementation in nolibc.
> 
> Add a custom implementation of fork() to s390 that works.
> 
> While at it also add a testcase for fork().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>

Thanks for these. Please always Cc the authors of code you're fixing
(e.g. there could be more subtle details that only the author knows
about). Here I think it's OK, but I've CCed Sven and will add him to
your fix.

Thank you!
Willy