Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:34:48 +0000 From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com> To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, David Windsor <dave@...gbits.org>, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com> Subject: RE: Re: [RFC v4 PATCH 00/13] HARDENED_ATOMIC On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 09:23 -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 12:31 -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > > Keeping the implementation details of refcount_t and stats_t > > > opaque to the users should discourage misuse... > > > > I suspect a lack of inc_not_zero and dec_and_test would be the > > biggest things discouraging misuse of stats_t for reference counting > > :) > > Right, but it's the continuing atomic_t use that concerns me... >Can we remove inc_not_zero and dec_and_test functionality from the atomic_t macros? If you go this route, atomic*_add_unless also needs to be removed, since there are quite some cases when it is used for refcount functionality. I have a coccinelle rule now that found about 15 usages of it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.