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: <20200928124928.GA5834@lst.de>
Date:   Mon, 28 Sep 2020 14:49:28 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.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 Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 10:50:52AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> 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.

Well, we'll want it in linux-next and then 5.10.  Either a merge through
the RISC-V maintainer, or as part of the base branch from Al would
make sense to me.

>
> 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.