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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2020 20:22:59 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-aio@...ck.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE_COMPAT flag On Sun, Sep 20, 2020 at 08:10:31PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > IMO it's much saner to mark those and refuse to touch them from io_uring... Simpler solution is to remove io_uring from the 32-bit syscall list. If you're a 32-bit process, you don't get to use io_uring. Would any real users actually care about that?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists