linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests, x86, pkeys: test with random, unallocated protection keys

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: <20170225091014.GA24922@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 25 Feb 2017 10:10:15 +0100
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests, x86, pkeys: test with random, unallocated
 protection keys


* Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org> wrote:

> On 02/24/2017 12:45 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 02/23/2017 03:26 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >>> Shuah, I assume you'll take this patch in through the selftests tree.
> >>
> >> Yes I can do that.
> > 
> > No, let's not do that please, we have a fix and a self-tests update, I'd like them 
> > to be next in the Git space.
> > 
> > I'll apply the testcase too when applying the pkeys fix, ok?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > 	Ingo
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Yup. I noticed the first patch has to go through x86 tree, Sounds good
> to me. Please take both through. I am sending pull request for 4.11-rc1
> today. I have a few pkeys patches in there. Hope there won't be any
> conflicts.

Ok, I'll wait for your changes to hit upstream, to not create unnecessary 
conflicts.

Thanks,

	Ingo