netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] selftests: kselftest

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: <20240304153902.30cd2edd@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 15:39:02 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
 shuah@...nel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, mic@...ikod.net,
 linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, jakub@...udflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] selftests: kselftest_harness: support using
 xfail

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 15:14:04 -0800 Kees Cook wrote:
> > Ugh, I'm guessing vfork() "eats" the signal, IOW grandchild signals,
> > child exits? vfork() and signals.. I'd rather leave to Kees || Mickael.  
> 
> Oh no, that does seem bad. Since Mickaël is also seeing weird issues,
> can we drop the vfork changes for now?

Seems doable, but won't be a simple revert. "drop" means we'd need 
to bring ->step back. More or less go back to v3.
No preference here, Mickael?