linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/memfd: clear hugetlb pages on allocation

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: <CADhLXY7-62Q51_fCXs01kiZ5u=qpieXJbjqrJnvwGEpaR37khg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 14:56:32 +0530
From: Deepanshu Kartikey <kartikey406@...il.com>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>, 
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@...el.com>, 
	baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	syzbot+f64019ba229e3a5c411b@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memfd: clear hugetlb pages on allocation

Hi Oscar,

Thank you for catching these issues!

I have a question about scope: Should I fix all three issues (zeroing,
locking, uptodate) in a single patch for v2, or would you prefer:

1. My current patch for just the zeroing (security fix), and
2. A separate follow-up patch for the locking and uptodate issues?

I'm happy to do either - just want to make sure I'm following the preferred
approach for the mm subsystem.

Thanks,
Deepanshu