linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation/changes: Raise minimum supported binutils version to 2.23

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: <20200324091437.GB22931@zn.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 24 Mar 2020 10:14:37 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
        Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
        Mauro Rossi <issor.oruam@...il.com>,
        Michael Matz <matz@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/changes: Raise minimum supported binutils
 version to 2.23

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:02:02PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Borislav,
> 
> When I forwarded this patch, I fixed up one more line.
> (changes.rst duplicates the same information...)
> 
> Please see this. I hope this should be OK.
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1214519/

Thanks.

However, I wanted to queue this patch *after* 5.7-rc1 and so that it
lands in 5.8 and so that it has a maximum cycle in testing - well, it is
not really testing but getting more people to see it and have the chance
to complain - and not queue it now.

I did some searching on distrowatch.com last night and the couple of
distros shipping binutils 2.23 I saw, were already EOL but the search
was not exhaustive.

And from looking at your patchset, I think it should get the max time
testing in linux-next too, so that we have time to address any build
issues it might uncover.

IMO.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette