linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] kbuild: userprogs: introduce architecture-specific CC_CAN

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20251114042254.GB2566209@ax162>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 21:22:54 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>
Cc: Nicolas Schier <nsc@...nel.org>, Paul Walmsley <pjw@...nel.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
	Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
	sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] kbuild: userprogs: introduce
 architecture-specific CC_CAN_LINK and userprog flags

On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 10:31:10AM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 09:03:23PM +0100, Nicolas Schier wrote:
> > Thanks for the patch set and all the work behind!  I found only one
> > issue in patch 3, the rest looks good to me as they are.
> > 
> > I haven't reviewed the compiler flags for the archs, but from the formal
> > point of view they look good to me, too.
> > 
> > How shall we proceed with here?  I think, easiest would be if we get
> > appropriate acks from the architecture maintainers, so we could take
> > this via kbuild.
> 
> That would surely be the best option. Unfortunately quite frequently it is hard
> to get architecture maintainer's feedback on a cross-architecture series.
> 
> > Other opinions?
> 
> It would also work to only take the first three patches through the kbuild tree
> and push the other ones through the architecture trees.
> 
> I don't really have a clear preference.

If you do not have a preference, I think it would be easier if Nicolas
picks up the first three patches (which I will go review formally
shortly, sorry again for the delay on that) to make sure they make
6.19-rc1 then you can send out the architecture changes individually
with plans to pick up any ones that have been left behind after a
development cycle? That should give architecture maintainers enough time
to properly react and review the series (since they will know if those
flags are appropriate). We could probably send the last patch as a fix
if those changes do not land until 6.20-rc1.

Cheers,
Nathan