linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] revocable: hide the implementation details from users

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: <2026020654-sadly-anchor-00bc@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 16:08:18 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
	Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	driver-core@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] revocable: hide the implementation details from users

On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 11:32:06AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> -struct revocable_provider __rcu *revocable_provider_alloc(void *res)
> +revocable_provider_t revocable_provider_alloc(void *res)

While I understand why you did this, and it does save us the "__rcu"
usage which is essencial, it still makes me feel dirty seeing it :)

Also, as the __rcu pointer is now "hidden", what is that going to mean
for sparse usage?  Will this accidentally trigger problems if we do
anything with the pointer incorrectly?

thanks,

greg k-h