How implementation details become ABI: a case study [LWN.net]

How implementation details become ABI: a case study

Posted Oct 1, 2014 15:32 UTC (Wed) by PaXTeam (guest, #24616)
Parent article: How implementation details become ABI: a case study

Piotr originally reported the problem on the grsec forums:
https://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4031 and once identified, spender fixed it 3 weeks ago already.

to post comments

How implementation details become ABI: a case study

Posted Oct 1, 2014 16:17 UTC (Wed) by lkundrak (subscriber, #43452) [Link] (3 responses)

How is that relevant?

How implementation details become ABI: a case study

Posted Oct 1, 2014 17:02 UTC (Wed) by doogie (guest, #2445) [Link] (2 responses)

Did you read the messages on that forum? It's the same bug.

How implementation details become ABI: a case study

Posted Oct 9, 2014 5:32 UTC (Thu) by andza (guest, #72692) [Link] (1 responses)

Was it reported upstream and just as important, was the patch submitted to LKML? Otherwise I can only agree with the parent that it's mostly irrelevant.

How implementation details become ABI: a case study

Posted Oct 9, 2014 10:32 UTC (Thu) by PaXTeam (guest, #24616) [Link]

> Was it reported upstream

did you read the forum post?

> and just as important, was the patch submitted to LKML?

no because it was a quick hack, not something upstream (or even we) would want in the long run. in fact they've fixed it differently in the end (not their hack but Al's refcount approach) as you can read it in this very article.