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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 12:25:38 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> To: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>, Michael Matz <matz@...e.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/tools/relocs: Add _etext and __end_of_kernel_reserve to S_REL On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 11:17:25PM -0500, Arvind Sankar wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 07:08:26PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 12:59:38PM -0500, Arvind Sankar wrote: > > > How is "breaks with binutils before version 2.23" not clear enough? It > > > > Nevermind, I'll write it myself if/when I end up applying some version > > of it. I've wasted enough time trying to get my point across. > > > > You're wasting time, because you're not _listening_ to the other guy. FFS you're still missing the point: the question is whether this is a widespread issue - a distro shipping this funky binutils and therefore it being a problem on potentially more than one environment - or something people can only trigger by *specially* building themselves and thus a lot more seldom occurrence. And I've answered the question myself by booting openSUSE 12.1 - i.e., at least one distro has it. And regardless, so what if you add some more text to the commit message? Are you afraid that you'll over-describe the issue? Hell, you've typed more just in debating this. And let me tell you why it is a good thing to have more detailed explanations in commit messages: when you move on and go do something else, all that is left is a commit message for maintainers to do git archaeology on and scratch heads as to why stuff was done the way it was. And this happens very often: read a oneliner commit message and go find a crystal ball to figure out what the author meant. And I told you that *I* will write it myself and you wouldn't have to do diddly squat. And yet you still can't let it go! So you can debate all you want - you won't change my mind about wanting to have stuff explained in detail in commit messages. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists