linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 00/13] arm64: Branch Target Identification support

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]

Date:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 22:26:24 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Paul Elliott <paul.elliott@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>,
        Amit Kachhap <amit.kachhap@....com>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@...hat.com>,
        Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@....com>,
        "H . J . Lu " <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
        Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>,
        Kristina Martšenko <kristina.martsenko@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Sudakshina Das <sudi.das@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/13] arm64: Branch Target Identification support

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 05:01:43PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:58:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:18:16PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:12:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > 
> > > > It's probably easier for me if you just use the existing branch, I've
> > > > already got a branch based on a merge down.
> > 
> > > Okey doke, I'll funnel that in the direction of linux-next then. It does
> > > mean that any subsequent patches for 5.8 that depend on BTI will need to
> > > be based on this branch, so as long as you're ok with that then it's fine
> > > by me (since I won't be able to apply patches if they refer to changes
> > > introduced in the recent merge window).
> > 
> > That's not a problem, that's what I've got already and if I try to send
> > everything based off -rc3 directly the series would get unmanagably
> > large.  Actually unless you think it's a bad idea I think what I'll do
> > is go and send out a couple of the preparatory changes (the insn updates
> > and the last bit of annotation conversions) separately for that branch
> > while I finalize the revisions of the main BTI kernel bit, hopefully
> > that'll make the review a bit more approachable.
> 
> Okey doke, sounds good to me. I'm queuing stuff atm, so as long you tell
> me what I need to apply things against then we should be good.

Just a heads up: I've renamed for-next/bti to for-next/bti-user, so it
doesn't get confusing with the pending in-kernel BTI patches. All the commit
SHAs remain unchanged.

Will