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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 08B83C433E7 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 18:59:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6768A2071B for ; Tue, 1 Sep 2020 18:59:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="ebiQOl0H" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6768A2071B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BgxFn3Ml7zDqVV for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2020 04:59:41 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=chromium.org (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::1041; helo=mail-pj1-x1041.google.com; envelope-from=keescook@chromium.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=google header.b=ebiQOl0H; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pj1-x1041.google.com (mail-pj1-x1041.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1041]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BgxCX0FTKzDqNC for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2020 04:57:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pj1-x1041.google.com with SMTP id nv17so1084491pjb.3 for ; Tue, 01 Sep 2020 11:57:41 -0700 (PDT) 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:in-reply-to; bh=myAjLsXJJ5WrIyplttBLOJrb3cYFWSnfDJgomMmHBsY=; b=ebiQOl0HdWb1qsZ8K4nAaddfFhbr3U7deevLOcXXTD6OLvfKSnSROhSsCjgZ7mCdSU KEk3JPhKcmdeA0QtKKnHHoNdav2XUrlVbf6RKDK+ixxHf+lELn4fBRXQcE7RzE2wmQCF jhg7c/3b8g07wxtC6uK6VnR8kOyuLPgRU1LbY= 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:in-reply-to; bh=myAjLsXJJ5WrIyplttBLOJrb3cYFWSnfDJgomMmHBsY=; b=dqkTzzrTWr+6DMdmmwN0JMPjPVIDiAFMJdJATXHnNO9gahT0I6LQK4MIWQl3/KiE7K nuIz5L9XljDvMF7xnMebtXjnehj66Jt2ObVkd/8mcQ2XxBXNA5yj9Tcm+DTAcdMScylL +VKeQtj/LpC2R35XjL3ODdQuXHjgDmV8PGM7xgmIJZHZqWU+jRqJlGkeWpDIdwrcLt6f dqYdu26t23/OmsDPDd1CaqqIJsHlG36UfWCXKWUEwvnz4SxB9P+MPAHcjkvN9/sRy6dM 3J7U1TmdTSEMWn1FJicTeujLK8jzcVhNm82bS4xU9V8xWueRQbwsXxUWjPN5NmI7R7/5 N/sQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531zhe3O0ZgzEnn3cGTHowcANJxI3y5PtgNUSwpX4IAgPh9LvTFL BtdRsuQENpDLJzVFDA2dPDJ1eQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxM7CI6ObOTA/dAnpNqk4c7bPseM/evKd+pRwbVQYq3IOIRkOFgQb1ors7cvRWIw5JowuZv0w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:450d:: with SMTP id u13mr2718413pjg.99.1598986659307; Tue, 01 Sep 2020 11:57:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b10sm1613877pff.85.2020.09.01.11.57.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 01 Sep 2020 11:57:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2020 11:57:37 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] lkdtm: disable set_fs-based tests for !CONFIG_SET_FS Message-ID: <202009011156.0F49882@keescook> References: <20200827150030.282762-1-hch@lst.de> <20200827150030.282762-6-hch@lst.de> <20200829092406.GB8833@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200829092406.GB8833@lst.de> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch , linuxppc-dev , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Al Viro , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 11:24:06AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > 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. To clarify: if any of x86, arm64, arm, powerpc, riscv, and s390 are using set_fs(), I want to keep this test. "ugly" is fine in lkdtm. :) -- Kees Cook