linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] bpf: Adjustments for four function implementations

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: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 09:25:24 -0800
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, 
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, 
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, 
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] bpf: Adjustments for four function implementations

On Mon, Jan 1, 2024 at 1:10 AM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> wrote:
>
> >> A few update suggestions were taken into account
> >> from static source code analysis.
> >
> > Auto Nack.
> > Pls don't send such patches. You were told multiple
> > times that such kfree usage is fine.
>
> Some implementation details are improvable.
> Can you find an update step (like the following) helpful?
>
> [PATCH 2/5] bpf: Move an assignment for the variable “st_map” in bpf_struct_ops_link_create()
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ed2f5323-390f-4c9d-919d-df43ba1cad2b@web.de/

This change is not helpful at all. The use of "st_map" in current code as-is
doesn't cause any confusion, i.e., it is always struct bpf_struct_ops_map *.
OTOH, this patch will make it harder for folks who use git-blame. Therefore,
it adds negative value to the code base.

Thanks,
Song