linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] compiler.h: give up __compiletime_assert

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: <20180926190303.GA18293@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 21:03:03 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Christopher Li <sparse@...isli.org>,
        Sparse Mailing-list <linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@...ox.com>,
        Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] compiler.h: give up __compiletime_assert_fallback()

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:45:19AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > I'm not digging up a compiler.h patch from a web site and adding it to
> > the tree this late in the release cycle.  Especially given that it
> > hasn't had any testing anywhere...
> 
> Good point about it not living in -next.
> 
> Who should be carrying these sorts of patches? In the past it's been
> Andrew or Masahiro, yes? For linux-next, maybe it can go via -mm?

Either is fine with me, as long as it isn't one of my trees :)

thanks,

greg k-h