linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.4 00/28] 6.4.1-rc1 review

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: <11fef47a-4805-df0e-016e-d2a777087129@gmx.de>
Date:   Mon, 3 Jul 2023 21:24:56 +0200
From:   Helge Deller <deller@....de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-parisc <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
        John David Anglin <dave.anglin@...l.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.4 00/28] 6.4.1-rc1 review - hppa argument list too long

On 7/3/23 18:49, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2023 at 00:08, Helge Deller <deller@....de> wrote:
>>
>> Great, that patch fixes it!
>
> Yeah, I was pretty sure this was it, but it's good to have it
> confirmed. Committed.

Thank you!

Nice to see that Greg picked up the patch for stable that fast as well!

>> I wonder if you want to
>> #define VM_STACK_EARLY VM_GROWSDOWN
>> even for the case where the stack grows down too (instead of 0),
>> just to make clear that in both cases the stack goes downwards initially.
>
> No, that wouldn't work for the simple reason that the special bits in
> VM_STACK_INCOMPLETE_SETUP are always cleared after the stack setup is
> done.
>
> So if we added VM_GROWSDOWN to those early bits in general, the bit
> would then be cleared even when that wasn't the intent.
>
> Yes, yes, we could change the VM_STACK_INCOMPLETE_SETUP logic to only
> clear some of the bits in the end, but the end result would be
> practically the same: we'd still have to do different things for
> grows-up vs grows-down cases, so the difference might as well be here
> in the VM_STACK_EARLY bit.

Ok, thanks for explainig!

Helge