From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1D931F4B4 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:04:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF9673844025; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:04:43 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DF9673844025 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1601715883; bh=kWa64mPt9z8pLu/4+moL6QtIX0UOeaMP/julI9eBeDw=; h=References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=Wdly7v8Vy3l4cNwUMmpVibbQ7w/rOKclCNU77GzhZ6svGhGYXl8Xzmz57OqMti1Uk bP/npLiPNAC3s4LIruw4D/nG4jLG1wFmlkEZ1RK94CNuhIL5OqEXTH/vfyeYjTibWj sFYKHMGB1kz0dPUuLHaAW2hxBU9PT7+xCCpdwv8c= Received: from mail-il1-x144.google.com (mail-il1-x144.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::144]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C37453850423 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:04:40 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org C37453850423 Received: by mail-il1-x144.google.com with SMTP id l16so3391935ilt.13 for ; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 02:04:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kWa64mPt9z8pLu/4+moL6QtIX0UOeaMP/julI9eBeDw=; b=O/KltN+9sEsT3qLpn6kfDYiahBxBgNCFK+EB5XPMyUQ7jEMF9a+h/wVn5SJXSM/Wuk freBJzYp/uFQ2wulRjtKbKUu3w90Ici1cJJEt4j+DfyGa51OdR7tYmw4VWsYxV0GEbWO YeeWmI4kIuwIqOIlYenLlc3nGkdG99Qi5deqR1fZdC6rXfsooHzVXTYEHL8EQdGRt667 f5+2n2YXHa9auR1qaudiprbSeH1MJWtQPlm2mbTm0iJLGGtuW/liAmcXzyAA/dC1Ql5S CXEYPLqMfdaMh7rh46QQcuEryXjHwDM02rOMInJ0ssyQqtGyj2IZSzwxmthHKKu3b8z1 pM2A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531lOBoEHRtryue9GOuzrsd97Nu/KnnIseHTEY2YgyW1ow8Zo9JC wVexDYQImSkojHXI/XR+D8E1xXPLZYSxZCkXLDM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwY3MD3B6OzyiL3lz30zoFHVUlzsmuDJeZ4LD+CXkWAKLV4jzyZ6nO2QyIYrXuASDNmPl+GF2raGJ1PJR6e4QY= X-Received: by 2002:a92:9911:: with SMTP id p17mr1035266ili.165.1601715880285; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 02:04:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <22dd78e7-13a7-0bec-37ba-f3e32a9630ab@redhat.com> <5c6aa5c1-7962-6f05-a114-0d79c9cd9bc5@redhat.com> <83a3a3d8-0df5-604d-2de6-ae8e99adaca5@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <83a3a3d8-0df5-604d-2de6-ae8e99adaca5@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2020 12:04:29 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update tcache double-free check To: "Carlos O'Donell" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eyal Itkin via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Eyal Itkin Cc: Florian Weimer , GNU C Library Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" Ping. Is there any update on this subject? On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:40 PM Carlos O'Donell wrote: > > On 8/10/20 9:12 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > > On 8/10/20 9:07 AM, Eyal Itkin wrote: > >> Updated the patch to perform an atomic update operation on the global > >> entropy state, so to avoid races when multiple threads are initialized > >> simultaneously. The patch now accumulates entropy between threads, > >> while still using the backup case of ~tcache to take care of cases in > >> which no entropy was yet to be available. > >> > >> As Carlos mentioned earlier, I guess you will want to discuss this > >> patch before integrating it. Also, feel free to update the patch if > >> needed in case I missed some whitespace / long line coding style. > > > > Thank you for putting this together. I need to spend some time thinking > > more deeply on this and considering where the right balance might lie > > between a per-process value and a per-thread value. Particularly with > > respect to the tradeoff between maintaining the code and security. > > > > Do you have any strong opinions on the use of a per-thread vs. per-process > > value? > > > > This patch is third on my queue. > > > > My queue is currently: > > - NSS configuration reloading (DJ Delorie) > > - DSO sorting DFS (Chung-Lin Tang) > > - Tcache double-free check (Eyal Itkin) > > > > I got through the NSS configuration patches. > > I'm working again on DSO sorting. > > LPC 2020 is interrupting this week. > > Thanks for your patience. > > -- > Cheers, > Carlos. >