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: <Zjo1xyhjmehsRhZ2@google.com>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 07:12:51 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@...ikod.net>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, 
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, 
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 
	Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, Shengyu Li <shengyu.li.evgeny@...il.com>, 
	Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>, Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>, 
	David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, 
	"Günther Noack" <gnoack@...gle.com>, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>, Ron Economos <re@...z.net>, 
	Ronald Warsow <rwarsow@....de>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, 
	kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] Fix Kselftest's vfork() side effects

On Mon, May 06, 2024, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 06:55:08PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> > Shuah, I think this should be in -next really soon to make sure
> > everything works fine for the v6.9 release, which is not currently the
> > case.  I cannot test against all kselftests though.  I would prefer to
> > let you handle this, but I guess you're not able to do so and I'll push
> > it on my branch without reply from you.  Even if I push it on my branch,
> > please push it on yours too as soon as you see this and I'll remove it
> > from mine.
> 
> Yes, please. Getting this into v6.9 is preferred,

Very strongly prefered for KVM selftests.  The negative impact on KVM isn't that
the bugs cause failures, it's that they cause false passes, which is far worse
(and why the bugs went unnoticed for most of the cycle).

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ