linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] vfs pidfd

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]

Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 13:21:34 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] vfs pidfd

On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 at 13:09, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> It's used to compare pidfs and someone actually already sent a pull
> request for this to another project iirc. So it'd be good to keep that
> property.

Hmm. If people really do care, I guess we should spend the effort on
making those things unique.

> But if your point is that we don't care about this for 32bit then I do
> agree. We could do away with the checks completely and just accept the
> truncation for 32bit. If that's your point feel free to just remove the
> 32bit handling in the patch and apply it. Let me know. Maybe I
> misunderstood.

I personally don't care about 32-bit any more, but it also feels wrong
to just say that it's ok depending on something on a 64-bit kernel,
but not a 32-bit one.

So let's go with your patch. It's not like it's a problem to spend the
(very little) extra effort to do a 64-bit inode number.

             Linus