linux-kernel - Re: remove set

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: <mhng-9b0b114e-a104-40b7-b4f5-ad64dbbbd5bd@palmerdabbelt-glaptop1>
Date:   Sat, 26 Sep 2020 10:50:52 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject:     Re: remove set_fs for riscv v2

On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 21:37:52 PDT (-0700), Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Given tht we've not made much progress with the common branch,
> are you fine just picking this up through the riscv tree for 5.10?
>
> I'll defer other architectures that depend on the common changes to
> 5.11 then.

I'm OK taking it, but there's a few things I'd like to sort out.  IIRC I put it
on a temporary branch over here

    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/palmer/linux.git/log/?h=riscv-remove_set_fs

under the assumption it might get lost otherwise, but let me know if that's not
what you were looking for.

Arnd: Are you OK with the asm-generic stuff?  I couldn't find anything in my
mail history, so sorry if I just missed it.

Al: IIRC the plan here was to have me merge in a feature branch with this
stuff, but it'd have to be based on your for-next as there are some
dependencies over there.  I see 5ae4998b5d6f ("powerpc: remove address space
overrides using set_fs()") in vfs/for-next so I think we should be OK, but let
me know if I'm doing something wrong.

> On Wed, Sep 09, 2020 at 08:55:15AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> now that we've sorted out a remaining issue base.set_fs should not
>> be rebased any more, so you could pull it into the riscv tree or a topic
>> branch.
>>
>> The first four patch should go into base.set_fs, though.  Arnd, can you
>> re-review the updated patches?
> ---end quoted text---