linux-kernel - Re: arm: JUMP_LABEL and DEBUG_SET_MODULE

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: <20141015220943.GK27405@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:09:43 +0100
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@...il.com>, Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: arm: JUMP_LABEL and DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX should be mutually
 exclusive?

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:34:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:21 AM, Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@...il.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > i keep hitting this with BRIDGE=m, JUMP_LABEL=y and DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX=y:
> 
> I think my RO/NX patch series solves this. I sent a pull request, but
> I haven't seen any movement on it. :(

Sorry Kees.

However, even if I had looked at it, I would /not/ have been able to
pull it.  It does the absolutely fatal thing for any pull request:

The following changes since commit cc31d8f887953e9824c4d9333b15c335ee7d1b65:

  Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes' and 'misc' into for-next (2014-09-2+6 14:40:19 +0100)

That commit is on my "for-next" branch.  The clue is in the name. :)
Just like trying to base commits onto the linux-next tree, trying to
base commits on an aggregate branch intended for linux-next usage
doesn't work for all the same reasons.

The commit which ultimately ended up being merged was:

commit d5d16892243e7755da706d03b34da85ea6a74117
Merge: 3467e765a592 ad684dce87fa f3354ab67476 421520ba9829
Author: Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>
Date:   Thu Oct 2 21:47:02 2014 +0100

    Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes', 'l2c' (early part) and 'misc' into for-next

compared to the one you based on:

commit cc31d8f887953e9824c4d9333b15c335ee7d1b65
Merge: 3467e765a592 5ca918e5e3f9 e16343c47e42
Author: Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri Sep 26 14:40:19 2014 +0100

    Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes' and 'misc' into for-next

So, although "fiq" was the same, "fixes" had additional commits added,
an additional "l2c" branch was added, and two additional commits in "misc".

The reason why I publish a "for-next" branch is exactly so I don't have
to push out lots of individual branches, and then have to tell SFR which
branches he needs to pull on a regular basis.  "for-next" is an aggregate
unstable branch solely intended to be pulled into linux-next (and thus
inspected by others.)

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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/