linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, RFC] x86: also CFI-annotate certain inline asm()s

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Nov 2014 07:49:32 +0000
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To:	"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Tony Jones" <tonyj@...e.de>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] x86: also CFI-annotate certain inline asm()s

>>> On 12.11.14 at 21:36, <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nothing crashes with the unwind information being wrong. It is
>> solely you who was claiming (without proof) years ago that the
>> unwinder repeatedly caused issues.
> 
> Umm. We had oopses showing it. Several times.

And I know you've been saying so before. The only problem here is
- these weren't sent my way for investigation, at least as far as I
recall.

>> Yes, we did find a bug or two over the years in it
> 
> .. and you and Andi repeatedly refused to make the code more robust
> when I asked.

True, we considered _some_ of the requests you made wrong.

> Which is why I don't work with Andi or you directly any more,

People thinking differently than you in certain aspects shouldn't
preclude working with them directly, should it? Yes, it's a project you
started, but it has long become a community one, and as such
excluding people just because they don't conform to every opinion
of yours is, well, odd.

> But this patch I NAK'ed because the code is not readable, and the
> infrastructure is not bearable.
> 
> Live with it.

I got the message.

Jan

--
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/