Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] uio_pci_generic: add MSI/MSI-X support

[Gleb Natapov <gleb@scylladb.com>]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 11:32:50AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 08:33:45AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 08/10/15 00:05, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 07:39:16PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > >>That's what I thought as well, but apparently adding msix support to the
> > >>already insecure uio drivers is even worse.
> > >I'm glad you finally agree what these drivers are doing is insecure.
> > >
> > >And basically kernel cares about security, no one wants to maintain insecure stuff.
> > >
> > >So you guys should think harder whether this code makes any sense upstream.
> > 
> > You simply ignore everything I write, cherry-picking the word "insecure" as
> > if it makes your point.  That is very frustrating.
> 
> And I'm sorry about the frustration.  I didn't intend to twist your
> words. It's just that I had to spend literally hours trying to explain
> that security matters in kernel, and all I was getting back was a
> summary "there's no security issue because there are other way to
> corrupt memory".
> 
That's not the (only) answer that you were given. The answers that
you constantly ignore is that the patch in question does not add any
new ways to corrupt memory which are not possible using _upstream_
uio_pci_generic device, so the fact that uio_pci_generic can corrupt
memory cannot be used as a reason to not apply patches that do not corrupt
any memory. You seams to be constantly arguing that uio_pci_generic is
not suitable for upstream.

--
			Gleb.