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:   Wed, 1 Nov 2017 09:40:16 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:     Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
Cc:     Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
        Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
        Andrew Pinski <apinski@...ium.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] arm+arm64: vdso unification to lib/vdso/

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 06:04:19PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 10/31/2017 02:30 PM, Mark Salyzyn wrote:
> > Take an effort to recode the arm64 vdso code from assembler to C
> > previously submitted by Andrew Pinski <apinski@...ium.com>, rework
> > it for use in both arm and arm64, overlapping any optimizations
> > for each architecture. But instead of landing it in arm64, land the
> > result into lib/vdso and unify both implementations to simplify
> > future maintenance. This will act as the basis for implementing
> > arm64 vdso32 in the future.
> 
> In the original patch series, our QE folks found a problem that lead to
> its revertion from our internal trees. I've pinged them to check this
> latest version and followup if we see the same failures now.

Could you elaborate a bit on the problem you found, please? Even if you
don't see it with this series, it doesn't mean it isn't lurking somewhere
else (potentially even in mainline!).

Will

Powered by blists - more mailing lists