linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] tools/nolibc: fix build issues on aarch64 after unistd cleanup

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: <20210121201714.GA24484@1wt.eu>
Date:   Thu, 21 Jan 2021 21:17:14 +0100
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, valentin.schneider@....com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] tools/nolibc: fix build issues on aarch64 after
 unistd cleanup

On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:54:32AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > It would be great if this could be applied soon so that it's possible to
> > > use the rcutorture scripts without applying local hacks.
> > 
> > Makes sense. I was wondering, should we mark them for stable ? I don't
> > know if anyone relies on these tests to validate stable kernels in
> > fact.
> 
> I added Fixes tags that should make this happen, and they are now visible
> at -rcu branch "dev".  Could you please check them for me?

I've just rerun all previous tests from my history and all of them are
OK. Please note however that I only did the manual build test, not through
the whole kvm.sh script, but a diff shows that the involved files are byte
for byte identical to those that Valentin and Mark tested, so for me that's
OK as well.

By the way, thank you for having completed the commit messages, I hope you
didn't spend too much time on this.

Cheers,
Willy