linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/tools/relocs: Add _etext and __end_of_kernel_reserve to S

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: <20200114112538.GD31032@zn.tnic>
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