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=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 12328C433E2 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 09:24:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E93B420936 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 09:24:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727099AbgH2JYK (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Aug 2020 05:24:10 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:44190 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726333AbgH2JYJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Aug 2020 05:24:09 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id DDC8268C4E; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 11:24:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 11:24:06 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Michael Ellerman , the arch/x86 maintainers , Kees Cook , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-arch , linuxppc-dev Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] lkdtm: disable set_fs-based tests for !CONFIG_SET_FS Message-ID: <20200829092406.GB8833@lst.de> References: <20200827150030.282762-1-hch@lst.de> <20200827150030.282762-6-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:06:28AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 8:00 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > Once we can't manipulate the address limit, we also can't test what > > happens when the manipulation is abused. > > Just remove these tests entirely. > > Once set_fs() doesn't exist on x86, the tests no longer make any sense > what-so-ever, because test coverage will be basically zero. > > So don't make the code uglier just to maintain a fiction that > something is tested when it isn't really. Sure fine with me unless Kees screams.