linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] powerpc: kprobes: emulate instructions on kprobe handler re-entry

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]

Date:   Thu, 20 Apr 2017 16:11:10 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] powerpc: kprobes: emulate instructions on kprobe handler re-entry

"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> Excerpts from Masami Hiramatsu's message of April 19, 2017 20:13:
>> 
>> BTW, as I pointed, 5/7 and 6/7 should be merged since this actually
>> makes meaningful change.
>
> Yes, sorry if I wasn't clear in my previous reply in the (!) previous 
> patch series.
>
> Since this has to go through the powerpc tree, I followed this since I 
> felt that Michael Ellerman prefers to keep functional changes separate 
> from refactoring. I'm fine with either approach.
>
> Michael?

Yeah I'd definitely like this to be two patches. Otherwise when reading
the combined diff it's much harder to see the change.

cheers