linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] iommu: Remove unrecoverable fault data

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: <ZNOdEtbMaHg9Vmmq@ziepe.ca>
Date:   Wed, 9 Aug 2023 11:05:06 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc:     Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>,
        "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@...el.com>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] iommu: Remove unrecoverable fault data

On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 12:01:52AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2023 2:40 AM
> > 
> > On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 03:51:30AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> > > > Sent: Friday, August 4, 2023 10:59 AM
> > > >
> > > > On 2023/8/3 15:54, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > >> From: Lu Baolu<baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
> > > > >> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2023 1:48 PM
> > > > >>
> > > > >>   struct iommu_fault {
> > > > >>   	__u32	type;
> > > > >> -	__u32	padding;
> > > > > this padding should be kept.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > To keep above 64-bit aligned, right?
> > > >
> > >
> > > yes
> > 
> > If it is not uapi we should not explicitly document padding (and __u32
> > should be u32). The compiler will add it if it is necessary.
> > 
> > If the compiler isn't right for some reason then something else has
> > gone wrong.
> > 
> 
> I thought this will be used as uAPI later. I'm fine to leave it be and
> add the padding when the uAPI is introduced.

Yes

Jason