| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 23:39:10 +0800 From: Wen Yang <wenyang.linux@...mail.com> To: Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com> Cc: "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] encode the values directly in the table entry On 2024/3/21 23:21, Joel Granados wrote: > On Sat, Mar 09, 2024 at 06:31:17PM +0800, wenyang.linux@...mail.com wrote: >> From: Wen Yang <wenyang.linux@...mail.com> >> >> The boundary check of multiple modules uses these static variables (such as >> two_five_five, n_65535, ue_int_max, etc), and they are also not changed. > This message is a bit cryptic. I had to do a fair amount of research to > get what you meant here. Having the context in front is OK with me, but > I would add a bit more information so the reader does not have to go to > the code and grep for the variables that you mean. Something like this: > "When using a sysctl proc_handler that requires a boundary check (like > proce_dointvec_minmax) it is common to use a const variable like n_65535 > in net/rxrpc/sysctl.c or OTHER EXAMPLES...). This is suboptimal because > YOUR REASONS HERE" > > Thanks a lot for your very considerate input – this is highly appreciated. We will revise the change message and send v3 later. -- Best wishes, Wen >> >> Eric points out: "by turning .extra1 and .extra2 into longs instead of >> keeping them as pointers and needing constants to be pointed at somewhere >> ... The only people I can see who find a significant benefit by >> consolidating all of the constants into one place are people who know how >> to stomp kernel memory." > I think it would be better to just link to the lore discussion. > >> >> This patch series achieves direct encoding values in table entries and still >> maintains compatibility with existing extra1/extra2 pointers. >> Afterwards, we can remove these unnecessary static variables progressively and >> also gradually kill the shared const array. > Two things: > 1. Please name the const array: sysctl_vals > 2. What is missing from this patchset to completely kill sysctl_vals? > >> >> Wen Yang (9): >> sysctl: support encoding values directly in the table entry >> kernel/sysctl-test: add some kunit test cases for min/max detection >> rxrpc: delete these unnecessary static variables n_65535, four, >> max_500, etc >> net: ipv6: delete these unnecessary static variables two_five_five and >> minus_one >> svcrdma: delete these unnecessary static variables min_ord, max_ord, >> etc >> sysctl: delete these unnecessary static variables i_zero and >> i_one_hundred >> epoll: delete these unnecessary static variables long_zero and >> long_max >> fs: inotify: delete these unnecessary static variables it_zero and >> it_int_max >> ucounts: delete these unnecessary static variables ue_zero and >> ue_int_max >> >> fs/eventpoll.c | 19 +- >> fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 49 +++-- >> include/linux/sysctl.h | 108 ++++++++++- >> kernel/sysctl-test.c | 300 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> kernel/sysctl.c | 61 +++++-- >> kernel/ucount.c | 8 +- >> lib/test_sysctl.c | 12 +- >> net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 15 +- >> net/rxrpc/sysctl.c | 169 ++++++++--------- >> net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/svc_rdma.c | 21 +-- >> 10 files changed, 571 insertions(+), 191 deletions(-) >> >> Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> >> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> >> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> >> Cc: Joel Granados <j.granados@...sung.com> >> Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> >> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org >> >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists