[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e6c8618a1585006dde44c17192a3bb7ae8ec5c0b.camel@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 17:53:19 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"ross.burton@....com" <ross.burton@....com>, "suzuki.poulose@....com"
<suzuki.poulose@....com>, "Szabolcs.Nagy@....com" <Szabolcs.Nagy@....com>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>, "corbet@....net"
<corbet@....net>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev"
<kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>, "kees@...nel.org" <kees@...nel.org>,
"oliver.upton@...ux.dev" <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>, "palmer@...belt.com"
<palmer@...belt.com>, "debug@...osinc.com" <debug@...osinc.com>,
"aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, "shuah@...nel.org"
<shuah@...nel.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "maz@...nel.org"
<maz@...nel.org>, "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>, "fweimer@...hat.com"
<fweimer@...hat.com>, "thiago.bauermann@...aro.org"
<thiago.bauermann@...aro.org>, "james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>,
"ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, "brauner@...nel.org"
<brauner@...nel.org>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"hjl.tools@...il.com" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"paul.walmsley@...ive.com" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, "ardb@...nel.org"
<ardb@...nel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org"
<linux-mm@...ck.org>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org"
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 12/40] mm: Define VM_SHADOW_STACK for arm64 when we
support GCS
On Thu, 2024-08-15 at 17:39 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Oh, thanks for the heads up - I'd missed that.
>
> Looking at this I think it makes sense to do as was done for x86 and
> split this out into a separate series (part of why I'd missed it),
> updating the generic implementation to do this by default. That'll
> touch a bunch of architectures and the series is already quite big,
> it's not really an ABI impact.
The series is already upstream. You just need to add an arm version of that
linked patch. But up to you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists