linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: Drop '-mthumb' from AFLAGS

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:   Thu, 17 Nov 2022 14:51:37 -0800
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@...ian.org>
Cc:     Serge Guelton <sguelton@...illa.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        "kernelci.org bot" <bot@...nelci.org>,
        Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@...illa.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: Drop '-mthumb' from AFLAGS_ISA

On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 11:34 AM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 11:15:09AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 2:58 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Fixes: 1d2e9b67b001 ("ARM: 9265/1: pass -march= only to compiler")
> > > Link: htps://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/-/blob/17354b030ac4252ff6c5e9d01f4eba28bd406b2d/debian/patches/930008-arm.diff
> >
> > Would you mind using
> > https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-llvm-team/llvm-toolchain/-/blob/snapshot/debian/patches/930008-arm.diff
> > as the link instead? The link on this commit message is a diff against
> > llvm-14, not ToT which is currently llvm-16; the context is quite
> > different as the logic moved source files completely.  Though it does
> > look like Sylvestre has not yet cut a 16 branch for debian's patches.
>
> I would rather use an actual hash to reduce the risk of the link going
> stale from either a branch rename or file rename/removal. I can use a
> hash from the snapshot branch instead, if that would work for you?

It doesn't matter much to me; I trust your judgement; you pick.
Perhaps that depends if the snapshot branch has stable SHAs or whether
they change over time? Maybe Sylvestre can comment on that.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers