[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxvZhBu9U1cqpVm4frv0p5mqu=0TxsSqE-=95ft8HvCVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 19:41:03 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Virtually mapped stacks with guard pages (x86, core)
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>>
>> So let me get the pure semantic patches done, and then for 4.8 when we
>> do the things that actually change real meaning we'll have a sane
>> base. Ok?
>
> Works for me. I'll see whether my vmap patches still apply and, if
> needed, rebase and send a v5.
Ok, I'e pushed out the cleanups (and all the pulls that always come in
on Friday afternoon - gaah, I shouldn't have tried doing this on a
Friday).
I'm attaching the current left-over patch that actually changes
things. It's obviously a composite, and includes your "remove
stack_smp_processor_id()" thing etc, so it's not meant to be used
as-is, but it does seem to work.
Interestingly, it seems pretty clean too, removing more lines than it
adds (despite the fact that it adds a new config option), and
generally making things prettier rather than the reverse.
That's always a good sign.
Linus
View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/plain" (17073 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists