[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 13:48:38 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...oraproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: mm: flip priority of CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:34:28PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
>> <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 04:11:22PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> >> * Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org> [151223 13:45]:
>> >> > We fixed a bunch of similar issues where code was located in the .data
>> >> > section for ease of use from assembly code. See commit b4e61537 and
>> >> > d0776aff for example.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks hey some assembly fun for the holidays :) I also need to check what
>> >> all gets relocated to SRAM here.
>> >>
>> >> In any case, seems like the $subject patch is too intrusive for v4.5 at
>> >> this point.
>> >
>> > Given Christmas and an unknown time between that and the merge window
>> > actually opening, I decided Tuesday would be the last day I take any
>> > patches into my tree - and today would be the day that I drop anything
>> > that causes problems.
>> >
>> > So, I've already dropped this, so tomorrow's linux-next should not have
>> > this change.
>> >
>> > You'll still see breakage if people enable RODATA though, but that's no
>> > different from previous kernels.
>>
>> Ugh, sorry for the breakage.
>>
>> Should this patch stay as-is and people will fix their various RODATA
>> failures during the next devel window, or should I remove the "default
>> y if CPU_V7"?
>
> I think we'll keep it as-is, and have another go with it at -rc1 time,
> when people have ample chance to then queue up fixes.
>
> They'll have had notice of it, so there's no excuse folk can't work on
> the problem in the mean time. (But, of course, they won't...)
Hi,
Just checking on this -- I resent it to the patch tracker at -rc1
time. Is this waiting for the other fixes to land first, or is there
something I should be doing?
Thanks!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
