netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] x86/bpf: Fix 64-bit JIT frame pointer usage

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190615125748.2c4xpgfuccanjx5d@treble>
Date:   Sat, 15 Jun 2019 07:57:48 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Kairui Song <kasong@...hat.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] x86/bpf: Fix 64-bit JIT frame pointer usage

On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:16:53PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:27 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 05:02:36PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:54 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > The previous patch you posted has my patch description, push/pop and
> > > > comment changes, with no credit:
> > > >
> > > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190614210555.q4ictql3tzzjio4r@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com
> > >
> > > I'm sorry for reusing one sentence from your commit log and
> > > not realizing you want credit for that.
> > > Will not happen again.
> >
> > Um.  What are you talking about?  The entire patch was clearly derived
> > from mine.  Not just "one sentence from your commit log".  The title,
> > the pushes/pops in the prologue/epilogue, the removal of the
> > "ebpf_from_cbpf" argument, the code spacing, and some of the non trivial
> > comment changes were the same.
> >
> > > I also suggest you never touch anything bpf related.
> > > Just to avoid this credit claims and threads like this one.
> >
> > Wth.  I made a simple request for credit.  Anybody can see the patch was
> > derived from mine.  It's not like I really care.  It's just basic human
> > decency.
> 
> derived? do you really think so ?
> Please fix your orc stuff that is still broken.
> Human decency is fixing stuff that you're responsible for.
> Your commit d15d356887e7 on April 23 broke stack traces.
> And we reported it 3 weeks ago.
> Yet instead of fixing it you kept arguing about JIT frame pointers
> that is orthogonal issue and was in this state for the last 2 years.

Again you're not making sense.  The fix has already been posted.  That
was the point of this patch set.

It's your call if you want to cherry pick the FP fix (which is a
dependency of the ORC fix) without taking the others.

-- 
Josh