netdev - Re: [RFC][PATCHES] sock_alloc_file() cleanups and fixes

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: <20171205.144443.2120550314318217897.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 05 Dec 2017 14:44:43 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     viro@...IV.linux.org.uk
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHES] sock_alloc_file() cleanups and fixes

From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 16:41:01 +0000

> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 10:35:24AM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
>> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 00:20:27 +0000
>> 
>> > 	1) massage sys_socketpair() (should be a pure cleanup)
>> > 	2) fix and clean up kcm_clone() (-stable fodder)
>> > 	3) switch sock_alloc_file() to new calling conventions.
>> > 
>> > 	It got some local testing, but it certainly needs more review.
>> > Diffstat for the entire thing is
>> 
>> Series looks great to me:
>> 
>> Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> 
> How do you prefer it to be handled?  KCM one should go into everything
> since 4.6 (with trivial modifications in 4.11 and 4.12 - both had
> massaged the place around the call of kcm_clone() a bit, but this fix
> overwrites the entire area and that can be dropped into earlier
> kernels without any problems).  I've put that into vfs.git#net-fixes
> and have the other two in vfs.git#for-davem on top of that, with
> you merging the latter into net-next.git and the former - into net.git.
> Is that OK with you, or would you prefer some other way of handling
> that kind of stuff?

Why don't you resubmit this to netdev as a non-RFC, I'll queue it up to
'net' and -stable as well.

Thanks Al.