linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/6] Bump minimum supported version of LLVM to 11.0.0

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]

Date:   Wed, 1 Dec 2021 11:41:17 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Tom Stellard <tstellar@...hat.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, cki-project@...hat.com,
        kernelci@...ups.io, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/6] Bump minimum supported version of LLVM to 11.0.0

On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 09:57:57AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> This patch series raises the minimum supported version of LLVM to
> 11.0.0.
> 
> Patch #1 outlines the issue, goes over the potential impact of the
> change, and does the actual bump. Subsequent patches clean up the
> various checks that are always true after the bump.
> 
> I have marked this revision as RFC to give various parties the option to
> comment on this bump before it is done, namely KernelCI and Linaro's
> LKFT, who are still testing clang-10. I have added some other folks to
> CC that I know are testing with clang to see if this impacts them in any
> way (as I would like to impact as few people as possible) but as far as
> I am aware, most other CIs and developers are testing closer to tip of
> tree. If that is not true, scream so that we can see what can be done
> about that. If I missed anyone who is actively testing with clang,
> please key them in and I will make sure to include them in future
> revisions (if any are needed).
> 
> It probably makes sense for this series to live in -mm.

Sounds good to me. Thanks!

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>

-- 
Kees Cook