linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/12] kconfig: implement CONFIG_HEADERS

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]

Message-ID: <CAK7LNAQ6U9ZSRHW+6J1PjwuefQPFFUwdjRdaLQT9NtRBkEGUAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 04:23:51 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>, 
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, 
	Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>, 
	Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, 
	Rae Moar <rmoar@...gle.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, 
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, 
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] kconfig: implement CONFIG_HEADERS_INSTALL for
 Usermode Linux

On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 8:00 PM Thomas Weißschuh
<thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> userprogs sometimes need access to UAPI headers.
> This is currently not possible for Usermode Linux, as UM is only
> a pseudo architecture built on top of a regular architecture and does
> not have its own UAPI.
> Instead use the UAPI headers from the underlying regular architecture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>

Applied to linux-kbuild with the subject prefix fixed.


What concerned me was that this patch creates
multiple paths to visit the same directory.


[1]
ARCH=um archheaders
  -> ARCH=x86 archheaders
    -> arch/x86/entry/syscalls/

[2]
ARCH=um headers
  -> ARCH=x86 headers
    -> depends on ARCH=x86 archheaders
      -> arch/x86/entry/syscalls/


After carefully reviewing the code, I was convinced that
this is not a race condition.
(I am particularly cautious about race conditions in parallel builds
and try my best to avoid such code.)








--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada