Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 12:34:28 -0800
From: Kees Cook <>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <>, Nicolas Pitre <>, 
	Laura Abbott <>, Arnd Bergmann <>, 
	Ard Biesheuvel <>, Catalin Marinas <>, 
	Will Deacon <>, LKML <>, 
	Linux-MM <>, 
	"" <>, 
	"" <>, 
	Laura Abbott <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: mm: flip priority of CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 04:11:22PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> * Nicolas Pitre <> [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"?


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.