linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] linkage: better symbol aliasing

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: <20220222224056.GA16976@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Tue, 22 Feb 2022 22:40:57 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, acme@...hat.com, ardb@...nel.org,
        bp@...en8.de, broonie@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        joey.gouly@....com, jpoimboe@...hat.com, jslaby@...e.cz,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] linkage: better symbol aliasing

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:09:19AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:58:31AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 04:22:25PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > Catalin, Will, Peter: I think this is ready now and would like to get it
> > > queued, but it looks like this may (trivially) conflict with other bits
> > > we'll want to queue in either the arm64 tree (Joey's string routine
> > > changes [4]), or tip tree (Peter's IBT series).
> > > 
> > > I assume the best thing to do would be to have a stable branch merged in
> > > both of those. I've tagged this such that it can be pulled (details
> > > below); Peter also suggested he could make a stable branch in the tip
> > > tree. Any preference?
> > 
> > No real preference, The conflicts on my end are really rather trivial
> > IIRC, but they're a nice clean-up.
> > 
> > If I don't take then, feel free to add:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> 
> Mark mentioned yesterday that this series will conflict with some pending
> rework to the arm64 string routines [1], so we probably want a shared
> branch to handle the fallout.
> 
> Do you plan to queue this someplace in -tip that I can pull from, or
> shall I create a stable branch on the arm64 side?

Following discussion on IRC, I've pushed this out to the for-next/linkage
branch on the arm64 git. Let's give it a day or so in -next, then if it
doesn't fall apart you can pull it in to -tip as well.

Cheers,

Will