linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] static_call() vs _

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YFOsUztBWZo5oM2a@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 18 Mar 2021 21:38:59 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, ardb@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        sumit.garg@...aro.org, oliver.sang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] static_call() vs __exit fixes

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:31:56PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> After more poking a new set of patches to fix static_call() vs __exit
> functions. These patches replace the patch I posted yesterday:
> 
>   https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YFH6BR61b5GK8ITo@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
> 
> Since I've reproduced the problem locally, and these patches do seem to fully
> cure things, I'll shortly queue them for tip/locking/urgent.

For all:

Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>

/Jarkkko