linux-kernel - Re: Requirements to merge new heaps in the kernel

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: <CANDhNCoLgzy=CPBWjBKLiJzRdnf=SS3AgtFJNB-CBYAo=UEQJA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:19:05 -0700
From: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...hat.com>
Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>, 
	Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...labora.com>, Brian Starkey <Brian.Starkey@....com>, 
	"T.J. Mercier" <tjmercier@...gle.com>, Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>, 
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, 
	linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Requirements to merge new heaps in the kernel

On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 1:38 AM Maxime Ripard <mripard@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> I wanted to follow-up on the discussion we had at Plumbers with John and
> T.J. about (among other things) adding new heaps to the kernel.
>
> I'm still interested in merging a carve-out driver[1], since it seems to be
> in every vendor BSP and got asked again last week.
>
> I remember from our discussion that for new heap types to be merged, we
> needed a kernel use-case. Looking back, I'm not entirely sure how one
> can provide that given that heaps are essentially facilities for
> user-space.
>
> Am I misremembering or missing something? What are the requirements for
> you to consider adding a new heap driver?

It's basically the same as the DRM subsystem rules.
https://docs.kernel.org/gpu/drm-uapi.html#open-source-userspace-requirements
ie: There has to be opensource user for it, and the user has to be
more significant than a "toy" implementation (which can be a bit
subjective and contentious when trying to get out of a chicken and egg
loop).

thanks
-john