linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 16/25] arm: Add support for generic vDSO (causing crash)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAAdtpL5cMZQPa-SdMdi3SZnO=3-FkTkDCZjgjyy5Gmcqo+-MXw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Dec 2019 15:56:15 +0100
From:   Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@...at.org>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...roid.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Huw Davies <huw@...eweavers.com>,
        Shijith Thotton <sthotton@...vell.com>,
        Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 16/25] arm: Add support for generic vDSO (causing crash)

On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 12:02 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 11:00 AM Vincenzo Frascino
> <vincenzo.frascino@....com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Philippe,
> >
> > On 05/12/2019 09:42, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > There are only 2 "Investigated-by" vs 7k+ "Suggested-by"... Is there a
> > > real difference?
> >
> > Not sure about that. My take is that Suggested-by is used when someone suggests
> > you how to possibly implement a feature and you go and do that. Investigated-by
> > is when there is a fix to make and someone comes to you with the exact solution
> > like in this case Arnd did.
>
> It's not a standard tag, but I suggested it because it does explain
> better what I did.
>
> You could also just explain in clear text that I did the analysis and then add
> the more normal Suggested-by tag, I don't care either way.

No problem, I was just wondering the subtle difference between both tags.
I don't mind which one you use, as long as this issue get fixed :)
Thanks for the patch BTW!

Regards,

Phil.

>       Arnd