From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 15:04:04 +0100 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Clear the stack Message-ID: <20180704140403.GE4828@arm.com> References: <20180629190553.7282-1-labbott@redhat.com> <706dc06b-0157-89cb-33a6-d0b9d811dcf0@redhat.com> <20180702095931.GB28665@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: To: Kees Cook Cc: Laura Abbott , Mark Rutland , Ard Biesheuvel , Kernel Hardening , LKML , linux-arm-kernel , Alexander Popov , Catalin Marinas List-ID: Hi Kees, On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 10:29:24AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 01:25:20PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> No worries! I've made the change locally and will push this out to > >> -next unless there are objections? > > > > I'm a bit wary of conflicts in entry.S, since it's likely that we're going > > to have a lot going on in there for 4.19. > > > > Could I take this via arm64 instead, please, or are there dependencies > > on other parts of your tree? > > It depends on the plugin existing, but we could split it up so the > arm64 part could go separately. It would just be a no-op in the arm64 > tree since CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STACKLEAK won't exist there. Whatever > works best for you! If you could split it up then that would be really helpful, please. Thanks, Will From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 15:04:04 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] arm64: Clear the stack In-Reply-To: References: <20180629190553.7282-1-labbott@redhat.com> <706dc06b-0157-89cb-33a6-d0b9d811dcf0@redhat.com> <20180702095931.GB28665@arm.com> Message-ID: <20180704140403.GE4828@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Kees, On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 10:29:24AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 01:25:20PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> No worries! I've made the change locally and will push this out to > >> -next unless there are objections? > > > > I'm a bit wary of conflicts in entry.S, since it's likely that we're going > > to have a lot going on in there for 4.19. > > > > Could I take this via arm64 instead, please, or are there dependencies > > on other parts of your tree? > > It depends on the plugin existing, but we could split it up so the > arm64 part could go separately. It would just be a no-op in the arm64 > tree since CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STACKLEAK won't exist there. Whatever > works best for you! If you could split it up then that would be really helpful, please. Thanks, Will