linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] sh: remove sh5 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <25e0729d-8158-94a4-f081-ccdfa50ecb1d@physik.fu-berlin.de>
Date:   Fri, 5 Jun 2020 19:58:29 +0200
From:   John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>
To:     Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] sh: remove sh5 support

Hi Rich!

On 6/5/20 5:59 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> Ah, sorry, I missed that. You're right, it should probably go through
>> someone else's tree then.
> 
> Do you know if it's needed to un-break sh4? If so we should push to
> get whoever has jurisdiction over it to include it; otherwise I'm
> indifferent.

No, the patch is only necessary when enabling Infiniband support with
CONFIG_INFINIBAND_USER_ACCESS enabled.

However, according to Geert, every architecture is supposed to have
64-bit get_user() these days, therefore my patch is required anyways,
but it's not an acute problem.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@...ian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913