linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86, vdso32: handle 32 bit vDSO larger one page

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Mar 2014 10:28:10 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Stefani Seibold <stefani@...bold.net>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
	andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
	Martin Runge <Martin.Runge@...de-schwarz.com>,
	Andreas Brief <Andreas.Brief@...de-schwarz.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86, vdso32: handle 32 bit vDSO larger one page

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 8:53 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 03/12/2014 03:59 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> Note that this code is completely unnecessary if either of my patch
>> sets is accepted.  Since you're the maintainer, can you give an
>> opinion? :)
>>
>
> I'm trying to unwind all the patches going around, Linus' feedback and
> so on, and figure out what this means in concrete terms especially in
> the light of the 3.15 merge window coming up.
>
> I tried to apply your patchset "[PATCH v2 0/2] x86: Relocate the compat
> vdso per process" on top of tip:x86/vdso, but it conflicts pretty hard
> -- I guess you are using a different baseline, but that makes it
> complicated to deal with.

It applies to -linus.  I think that we should resolve the compat
issues first and then add timing code on top, since a decent chunk of
Stefani's changes will be unnecessary once the compat vdso is either
gone or unified with the non-compat vdso.

Does this mean you prefer the relocation approach to the compat vdso
removal approach?  It seems like Linus is okay with either one.

--Andy

>
> Otherwise, it seems the logical way forward.  Could you and/or Stefani
> work out the conflicts between the patchsets?
>
> In the meantime I'm going to apply Stefani's first patch.
>
>         -hpa
>



-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/