From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kees Cook Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/11] ELF: UAPI and Kconfig additions for ELF program properties Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:49:35 -0800 Message-ID: <202002252147.7BFF9EE@keescook> References: <20200212192906.53366-1-broonie@kernel.org> <20200212192906.53366-2-broonie@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200212192906.53366-2-broonie@kernel.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Alexander Viro , Paul Elliott , Peter Zijlstra , Yu-cheng Yu , Amit Kachhap , Vincenzo Frascino , Marc Zyngier , Eugene Syromiatnikov , Szabolcs Nagy , "H . J . Lu " , Andrew Jones , Arnd Bergmann , Jann Horn , Richard Henderson , Kristina =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C5=A1enko?= , Thomas Gleixner , Florian Weimer , Sudak List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 07:28:56PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > From: Dave Martin > > Pull the basic ELF definitions relating to the > NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note from Yu-Cheng Yu's earlier x86 shstk > series. Both BTI and SHSTK depend on this. If BTI doesn't land soon, can this and patch 2 land separately? I don't like seeing the older version in the SHSTK series -- I worry there will be confusion and the BTI version (which is more up to date) will get missed. What's left to land BTI support? -- Kees Cook From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-f195.google.com ([209.85.214.195]:44529 "EHLO mail-pl1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726823AbgBZFti (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:49:38 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f195.google.com with SMTP id d9so824952plo.11 for ; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:49:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:49:35 -0800 From: Kees Cook Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/11] ELF: UAPI and Kconfig additions for ELF program properties Message-ID: <202002252147.7BFF9EE@keescook> References: <20200212192906.53366-1-broonie@kernel.org> <20200212192906.53366-2-broonie@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200212192906.53366-2-broonie@kernel.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Mark Brown Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Alexander Viro , Paul Elliott , Peter Zijlstra , Yu-cheng Yu , Amit Kachhap , Vincenzo Frascino , Marc Zyngier , Eugene Syromiatnikov , Szabolcs Nagy , "H . J . Lu " , Andrew Jones , Arnd Bergmann , Jann Horn , Richard Henderson , Kristina =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C5=A1enko?= , Thomas Gleixner , Florian Weimer , Sudakshina Das , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin Message-ID: <20200226054935.gBDBPiaRhUKBQO3bW6Ek9tVa1gYYsLYmHtt-OJtskik@z> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 07:28:56PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > From: Dave Martin > > Pull the basic ELF definitions relating to the > NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note from Yu-Cheng Yu's earlier x86 shstk > series. Both BTI and SHSTK depend on this. If BTI doesn't land soon, can this and patch 2 land separately? I don't like seeing the older version in the SHSTK series -- I worry there will be confusion and the BTI version (which is more up to date) will get missed. What's left to land BTI support? -- Kees Cook