From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A62724DCE2 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2025 21:47:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754430470; cv=none; b=OLa2axOD2kFKmcqEOYFjD5Eup5Gb11EwoCoF1hx0AzMdG5HLY7i6TOxxwGg2M5IKX8wXJl1xDy0JALvmu3A8lOWiHIn2g36U37J2ZI11/drBRmqmxf92YtKaBcF8YDq3xgBLXAVifb7gKFRgrZI4KFXIbhLSeptI6xOaM3ZjIJc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754430470; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yYeG1V6t4ZHRjGttv1pJDmBATEHcfx0p5yuWagvDGXU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=hOSqT4pLPobYKCjU6WlzuaNVX92yeds4QmQ1OO0rk48Z1upQ0NJeFZHrUxVEhw2zeZHIgK9VwHVAmwZrJpJady7WcM7BXlA1py7wL3hVDowr8elTp36Y9nlaGj5h0yDgeSDTu77qWOUIEWvtg2aYG8Ki8x+LtlbWIb6Ln99vaLc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=uC31QA0g; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=VK166dwQ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="uC31QA0g"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="VK166dwQ" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1754430467; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=FLCk+N1CEF+OQ37UtR8LN9SHMYLGmt5Mn4Kf7hVjXto=; b=uC31QA0gtnktRHnmxfzIlR++SJWu3B+riqv2IUEaewtBMhpnYTgR288qjbmOjQ1qJfZshL mWaWvQCMXVtzNktd6BnuFLurjaAUDfjmeBV+a6agJVSbC1ncLxiFMKabcjw/mqyDF2U9R1 9J5ooaymYybSIZNgLqheCFkkDNCqqGUcEa20UJCENWgZSjKV6tz1OzMq3PBBIQ/7VoNSND lkiPNawnakRAjEVU99/ejo0xEUA8Kp/X0ZLuQhXjqyfNiH7MPEz7vxSEnNaEkQXf763MEf 68nlgBlpaEXPhbJP7hXEFoog/iVjLh+HyPzo6JOk+PNs4tlFEhYPVDWwjDzovg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1754430467; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=FLCk+N1CEF+OQ37UtR8LN9SHMYLGmt5Mn4Kf7hVjXto=; b=VK166dwQKu1w1o4hmRDEfRAhhSYQNy/UDIE8FTbH1y9akAIF3aASNCTj9tIqa8BrW7kJGN UJmoFZrNtdY8u9BA== To: Pranav Tyagi , mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, dvhart@infradead.org, dave@stgolabs.net, andrealmeid@igalia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: jann@thejh.net, keescook@chromium.org, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev, Pranav Tyagi Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] futex: don't leak robust_list pointer on exec race In-Reply-To: <20250805154725.22031-1-pranav.tyagi03@gmail.com> References: <20250805154725.22031-1-pranav.tyagi03@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2025 23:47:45 +0200 Message-ID: <871pppfnjy.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 05 2025 at 21:17, Pranav Tyagi wrote: > + > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMPAT) && compat) > + head =3D p->compat_robust_list; This still does not compile because the dead code elimination comes _after_ the compiler decodes this line. I don't even need to fire up a compiler to predict the error emitted when CONFIG_COMPAT=3Dn: error: =E2=80=98struct task_struct=E2=80=99 has no member named =E2=80=98= compat_robust_list=E2=80=99 No? There is a reason why I suggested you to use that helper function. You are obviously free to ignore me, but then please make sure that the stuff you submit compiles _AND_ works. Otherwise if you are not sure, why I told you, ask. Please take your time and stop rushing out half baken crap, which wastes everybodys time. I don't care about your time wasted, but I pretty much care about mine. To be clear: I don't want to see this in my inbox again before next week and then it better be correct. Thanks, tglx