netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next] af_unix: fix a fatal race with bit fields

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: <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B7222@saturn3.aculab.com>
Date:	Fri, 3 May 2013 09:20:21 +0100
From:	"David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:	"Alan Modra" <amodra@...il.com>,
	"Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	"Anton Blanchard" <anton@...ba.org>,
	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"Paul Mackerras" <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"Ambrose Feinstein" <ambrose@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next] af_unix: fix a fatal race with bit fields

> Did someone fix btrfs, but not check other kernel locks?  Having now
> hit the same problem again, have you checked that other kernel locks
> don't have adjacent bit fields in the same 64-bit word?  And comment
> the struct to ensure someone doesn't optimize those unsigned chars
> back to bit fields.

Seems a good reason to have a general policy of not using
bit fields!

Separate char fields normally generate faster code - possibly
at the expense of an increase in the allocated size of a
structure.

	David


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html