On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 11:57:37AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> 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 manipulat
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 m
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 m
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_f
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, becau
Once we can't manipulate the address limit, we also can't test what
happens when the manipulation is abused.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs.c | 4
drivers/misc/lkdtm/usercopy.c | 4
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/misc/lkdtm/bugs
