linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 19/25] xtensa: define syscall_get

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: <CAMo8BfL1ENxo__XouYg6pNja-fe21yF_hXrPhMi82nf8J9TZOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:29:46 -0800
From:   Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>
To:     ldv@...linux.org
Cc:     oleg@...hat.com, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        lineprinter@...linux.org, esyr@...hat.com,
        Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, eparis@...hat.com,
        linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, linux-audit@...hat.com,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 19/25] xtensa: define syscall_get_* functions

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:30 PM Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@...linux.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 11:24:02PM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:14:37PM -0800, Max Filippov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 4:53 AM Dmitry V. Levin <ldv@...linux.org> wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Dec 09, 2018 at 09:02:50PM -0800, Max Filippov wrote:
> > > > > How should we synchronize our changes?
> > > >
> > > > No problem, I can revert to the previous edition of this patch
> > > > that just adds syscall_get_arch.
> > > > Alternatively, you can just take that couple of patches (v5 18/25
> > > > and v2 15/15) into your tree.
> > >
> > > Sure I can do the second. Will it work for v2 16/15 that changes
> > > syscall_get_arch adding an argument to it?
> >
> > No, I'm afraid it won't work for v2 16/15 (aka v5 22/25), which means
> > I'd have to keep them in the series.
>
> You can surely take them into your tree, but I'll have to keep them
> in the series because of that change of syscall_get_arch signature.
> Sorry for confusion.

Ok, no problem, I'll take them. I'm planning to merge this branch into the
for-next in a couple of days, let's see how it goes after that.

-- 
Thanks.
-- Max