[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whRTihOdCij9MxpG433cB_9ZHhBeMVAVpAA5Bf2mdr5yA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 10:53:40 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] objtool changes for v5.19
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 11:02 PM Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Note that with your latest tree you'll get 3 new conflicts:
No problem, but the conflicts did make something clear: the objtool
code should just get rid of the "--uaccess" flag that is now
unconditional when CONFIG_X86_SMAP has been removed.
I didn't actually do that, and instead just did the mindless merge
conflict resolution, but it might be a good idea.
See commit dbae0a934f09 ("x86/cpu: Remove CONFIG_X86_SMAP and
'nosmap'") for when it was removed.
Josh? The patch *might* be something like the attached, but this is
(a) untested and (b) that 'opts.noinstr' part of the patch is a bit
dodgy (ie I made the previous 'if' unconditional, but then changed the
follow 'else if ()' to just 'if ()' instead of deleting it, which is
what "uaccess is always set" would technically have done.
Again: I did *not* do this as part of the merge, the attached patch is
just a suggestion of something that I think should now be done after
the merge.
Hmm?
Linus
View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (4744 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists