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  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]
Date:   Sat, 9 May 2020 21:47:47 -0700
From:   Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
CC:     Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/21] bpf: implement bpf iterator for kernel
 data



On 5/9/20 5:27 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 10:58:59AM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>
>> Changelog:
>>    v3 -> v4:
>>      - in bpf_seq_read(), if start() failed with an error, return that
>>        error to user space (Andrii)
>>      - in bpf_seq_printf(), if reading kernel memory failed for
>>        %s and %p{i,I}{4,6}, set buffer to empty string or address 0.
>>        Documented this behavior in uapi header (Andrii)
>>      - fix a few error handling issues for bpftool (Andrii)
>>      - A few other minor fixes and cosmetic changes.
> 
> Looks great overall. Applied.
> But few follow ups are necessary.
> 
> The main gotcha is that new tests need llvm with the fix
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__reviews.llvm.org_D78466&d=DwIBAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=bCI_s36swhyaNaGGr3YQ0eQH9Lc-hpSGQy3u9fCRL9A&s=FLMd73HYbmZPnZrtCE9ntzg9e9eHOCioQbrt1w4sgWU&e= .
> I think it was applied to llvm 10 branch already,
> but please add selftests/bpf/README.rst and mention
> that above llvm commit is necessary to successfully pass the tests.
> Also mention the verifier error that folks will see when llvm is buggy.

Okay. Will have a followup patch for this.

> 
> Few other nits I noticed in relevant patches.
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists