linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET v4] Add io_uring futex/futexv support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 19:51:46 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, andres@...razel.de
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v4] Add io_uring futex/futexv support

On 8/14/23 6:47 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14 2023 at 18:18, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 8/14/23 6:12 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
>>>> We're now resorting to name calling? Sorry, but I think that's pretty
>>>> low and not very professional.
>>>
>>> I'm not resorting to that. If you got offended by the meme which
>>> happened to elapse into my reply, then I can definitely understand
>>> that. That was not my intention at all. But you might think about why
>>> that meme exists in the first place.
>>
>> It's been there since day 1 because a) the spelling is close, and b)
>> some people are just childish. Same reason kids in the 3rd grade come up
>> with nicknames for each others. And that's fine, but most people grow
>> out of that, and it certainly has no place in what is supposedly a
>> professional setting.
> 
> Sure. Repeat that as often you want. I already made clear in my reply
> that this was unintentional, no?

Wasn't clear to me, and your repeated undertones don't help either.

> Though the fact that this "rush the feature" ends up in my security
> inbox more than justified has absolutely nothing to do with my
> potentially childish and non-professionl attitude, right?

I've already made it clear that nothing is being rushed, yet you keep
harping on that. It was in my reply, again, though you gracefully
ignored that, again.

Have we had security issues? For sure, and more than I would've liked.
By far most of that is for old kernels, not the current code base. We've
made good progress getting that migrated back, and it's always top of
the mind when developing new features. If you think I don't take this
seriously, then you are ignorant, and suggesting otherwise is slander.
And since it's apparently a big problem in your inbox, you will have
undoubtedly also seen that we've always been handling these well and
expediently.

-- 
Jens Axboe