linux-kernel - Re: Follow-up on Linux-kernel code accessibility

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: <aUWSjl0MR4KZq-iy@laps>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 12:59:42 -0500
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Gabriele Paoloni <gpaoloni@...hat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Chuck Wolber <chuckwolber@...il.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, Chris Mason <clm@...a.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Follow-up on Linux-kernel code accessibility

On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 12:09:45PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 19, 2025 at 07:51:47AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> automatically in many cases, or regenerated automatically from some hints.
>> But the low-level ones may be needed to make the bridge between the code
>> and the high-level specification.
>
>Sasha's API specification framework patches might be something that's
>worth considering in this context.  The thing that we need be careful
>though, is that we might need to have a way of tagging kernel
>functions in terms of the priority for the first set of high-level
>interfaces for a newcomer to the kernel should look at first, and
>those that might be less important, so that the newcomer won't get
>overwhelmed with a vast number of low-level definitions.

I just sent a refreshed version earlier today
(https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251218204239.4159453-1-sashal@kernel.org/),
which also links to a branch that has over 100 LLM-generated syscall specs.

The nice thing about it is that we don't need to trust the LLM to do the right
thing: the spec is machine readable and we can generate testing based off of
it. Running something like LTP using those specs is pretty good at highlighting
issues - whether in the spec or the actual implementation.

I'd we weary to see complex specs in kernel-internal functions. Those often get
refactored and improved. Having complex speccing on them will make that work
much more difficult and complex.

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha