linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] ARM: clang support

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:   Mon, 7 May 2018 17:09:41 -0400
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>
Cc:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Behan Webster <behanw@...verseincode.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Bernhard Rosenkränzer 
        <Bernhard.Rosenkranzer@...aro.org>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] ARM: clang support

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch> wrote:
> On 25.03.2018 20:09, Stefan Agner wrote:
>> This patchset fixes some remaining issues when building the ARM
>> architecture using LLVM/clang.  The patchset requires the following
>> kbuild change:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/19/1756
>>
>> With that patch and this patchset applied and I can successfully
>> build (and boot) the multi_v7_defconfig with 4.16-rc5 using clang
>> 5.0.1 and 6.0.0.
>
> Russel, Arnd, any comment on this patch series? How can we get it
> merged?
>
> I was thinking patch 1 through armsoc since that is the way previous
> patches have been merged.

Please resend it to arm@...nel.org.

Lorenzo, Robin, Will, Suzuki: could one of you look at the patch and
provide an Ack
and maybe send a patch to add a MAINTAINERS file entry for the the
arm-cci driver to make it less ambiguous to who's responsible for it?

I know very little about the code and don't want to be the main person having
to decide if a patch can go in or not.

> Note sure about patch 2,

This should be up to Ard to pick up or comment on. I think I had
previously suggested a similar patch to him, but don't remember
what happened to that.

> Russel can you comment on Thierry's email?
>
> And patch 3 through 6 through Russel's tree?

Sounds good to me. Please submit those through
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/ once they are
ready. I think patches 4, 5 and 6 are good to go in, while patch
3 has an unfinished discussion.

It might also be a good idea to pick up the CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
problem and disable that option for clang based builds now, using
the new infrastructure we have for detecting compiler features at
Kconfig time.

       Arnd