From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ADA2C43331 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 21:22:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mother.openwall.net (mother.openwall.net [195.42.179.200]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B11E72087E for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 21:22:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="Ky5hD77i" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B11E72087E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernel-hardening-return-17325-kernel-hardening=archiver.kernel.org@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 28240 invoked by uid 550); 7 Nov 2019 21:22:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kernel-hardening-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Received: (qmail 28206 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2019 21:22:35 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=+qj3XLHt+SYTeocMUZeDhWvGmwBggOIPZFXl4NUMeQo=; b=Ky5hD77iYTRmc6UyBnOOlSZh4braSAQzKet/wLbXnCmURUQQYEXHyXtebq2mIH90pa S8qw53GnJRTk5d0lAsTEhre6Ibye9Wvqz/CHjPP2a1+uROphGs+ZQRScO9sbvcLtU6/0 8zU5cRKSn76+0Eiluaw8+vuUrflA7DneRbOlQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=+qj3XLHt+SYTeocMUZeDhWvGmwBggOIPZFXl4NUMeQo=; b=PavqYumD3Vffs3gdEGWSYFYn1ItOxDqFTs2rzEKbnVU+IC9hu/Sy2oIXn/TglBVJqM HwLrwMf2IumEI/7Ix/BQBlmOwHHJzotKaiHYx1MHrqf6i89/2+nPrZuF09jJrZ3kwXIp 2uHgPP5LSW4kMtnb1PnzNDbywMlsV5DLulMMMTUiWeCmQzDbMyI6CPX3egLJpiWPQDWc RL/m2UOWOL9z5hZfjyeVXX+kKvSjAeRFlwXZ8eJ6C/oWMKll1JAcSbWQki3yFksxNcOm xACsiOU5A8o/G9Wpga/GA6XWBcGvZZTL5Ujn0OvGfbmHi8af1umwbMc9yyFjJtgRhZAi JxLg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVfHIIptid32ZwuApbsXUpItbN10HR99mfDge6HQmDytNEkTRKF +0GSrKHn0wkQUKby2ZrxtGSJOA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzbb3c9TtEyDFSTUtqpT1SM6aU7Owbh+M+c5MOfB6ltxuhMjIcg741a+GZNZWN6ZrZCgl2qlw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:2d81:: with SMTP id t123mr7262031pgt.306.1573161743398; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 13:22:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 13:22:21 -0800 From: Kees Cook To: Romain Perier Cc: Allen , Kernel Hardening Subject: Re: [PRE-REVIEW PATCH 00/16] Modernize the tasklet API Message-ID: <201911071321.8A2A664B4A@keescook> References: <20190929163028.9665-1-romain.perier@gmail.com> <201909301552.4AAB4D4@keescook> <20191001174752.GD2748@debby.home> <201910101531.482D28315@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 08:29:40AM +0100, Romain Perier wrote: > Le mer. 30 oct. 2019 à 09:21, Allen a écrit : > > > > Romain, > > > > > > > First of all Romain, nice work. I started working on this > > set a few months back, but could only carve out limited time. > > > > I sent out RFC for this sometime in May[1]. And my approach > > was a little different when compared to what you have sent on the > > list. > > > > Well, I have pushed my work to github[2], only thing I could > > think of as an improvement in your patch set it to break it down > > into smaller chunk so that it's easier to review. I have made each > > occurrence of tasklet_init() into a commit[3] which I thought would > > make it easier to review. I'll leave that decision to you and kees. > > > > Let me know if I could help in any way. > > > > [1] https://www.openwall.com/lists/kernel-hardening/2019/05/06/1 > > [2] https://github.com/allenpais/tasklet > > [3] Sample list of patches: > > 5d0b728649b6 atm/solos-pci: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > e5144c3c16d8 atm: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > 71028976d3ed arch/um: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > c9a39c23b78c xfrm: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > 91d93fe12bbc mac80211: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > d68f1e9e4531 ipv4: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > 4f9379dcd8ad sound/timer: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > b4519111b75e drivers/usb: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > 52f04bf54a5a drivers:vt/keyboard: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > 295de7c9812c dma/virt-dma: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > 6c713c83b58f dma/dw: Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > eaaaaba8a4a7 debug:Convert tasklets to use new tasklet_init API > > b23f4ff5021b tasklet: prepare to change tasklet API > > From experience, this is better to group bunch of commits like we > currently do with Kees on this series, instead to have one commit per > change (I mean for huge patchset) > Mainly because you have too much replacements with this API change, > and it will be really complicated to merge. > > Last time I have proposed an API change for removing "pci_pool" , it > was a patchset of 20 commits (something like this), it tooks 6 months > to be merged :) (with a fine grain granularity on each commit) > > This is better to be the more atomic as possible. If we split the "one > massive tasklet_init replacement" commit into many commit, I am sure > that we find old tasklet API for months in the kernel... it is not > something we want , imho. + treewide commits are common in the kernel > tree, for important API changes :) > > @Kees: agreed ? > > I think that the timer_list approach is good. You can help by > providing feedbacks and by testing if you want. It worked well the last time. :) I think splitting the non-mechanical changes and landing those first is the right approach. Then we can land a massive treewide for all the "easy" cases without trickling them in over months. -Kees -- Kees Cook