linux-kernel - Re: Urgent: x86-32 and GNU ld 2.22.52.0.1

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]

Message-ID: <4FB69F5A.2060808@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 May 2012 12:13:30 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Urgent: x86-32 and GNU ld 2.22.52.0.1

On 05/18/2012 12:11 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>>
>> So the question is: do you want to simply take the patches from the
>> trampoline branch (which are reasonably tested) or do a minimal backport
>> which only throws an error (which would not be)?
> 
> All 4 of those patches?  They look simple and "sane" to me.  They solve
> the problem even with the "buggy" binutils, right?  If so, sure, I'll
> take those after they land in Linus's tree, which I'm guessing will be
> for 3.5-rc1, right?
> 

We think they fix the problem even with the buggy binutils... and will
throw an error if they don't.  I intend to push them for 3.5-rc1, but
Linus may want something for 3.4.

	-hpa

--
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/