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: <20230828105453.GB19186@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Aug 2023 12:54:54 +0200
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:     Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kui-Feng Lee <kuifeng@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...nel.org>,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] bpf: task_group_seq_get_next: fix the
 skip_if_dup_files check

On 08/27, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
> On 8/27/23 1:19 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> >But. if the group leader M exits then M->files == NULL. And in this case
> >task_seq_get_next() will need to "inspect" all the sub-threads even if they all
> >have the same ->files pointer.
>
> That is correct. I do not have practical experience on how much
> possibility this scenario may happen. I assume it should be very low.

Yes. I just tried to explain why the ->files check looks confusing to me.
Nevermind.

Could you review 6/6 as well?

Should I fold 1-5 into a single patch? I tried to document every change
and simplify the review, but I do not want to blow the git history.

Oleg.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ