From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Two-phase seccomp and x86 tracing changes
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:45:03 -0700
Message-ID: <53D6E07F.7090806@zytor.com>
References: <cover.1405992946.git.luto@amacapital.net>	<CAGXu5jJ93-vto9voMENc4jX5itcd_Rm5AZjeChF57fpMYnWocA@mail.gmail.com>	<CALCETrVwqDeRbFOw=k_OhQZ4V6Pn5v3t8ODw75UuE7HKPFz=Sw@mail.gmail.com>	<53D68F91.4000106@zytor.com>	<CAGXu5jKJOrtjY9JsCBUvUbj_y4Hv+AeMEmGwWZZ18FmiZmAbbQ@mail.gmail.com>	<53D6DE1E.1060501@zytor.com> <CAGXu5jLjmHczeQiJN1Q+aGQKn_B+08FEXHWxjku6QedkGDhDTg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:50654 "EHLO mail.zytor.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750840AbaG1Xpk (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 28 Jul 2014 19:45:40 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jLjmHczeQiJN1Q+aGQKn_B+08FEXHWxjku6QedkGDhDTg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-arch.vger.kernel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, Linux MIPS Mailing List <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>

On 07/28/2014 04:42 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:34 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>> On 07/28/2014 04:29 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:59 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>>>> On 07/23/2014 12:20 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like patches 1-4 have landed here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux.git/log/?h=seccomp/fastpath
>>>>>
>>>>> hpa, what's the route forward for the x86 part?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess I should discuss this with Kees to figure out what makes most
>>>> sense.  In the meantime, could you address Oleg's question?
>>>
>>> Since the x86 parts depend on the seccomp parts, I'm happy if you
>>> carry them instead of having them land from my tree. Otherwise I'm
>>> open to how to coordinate timing.
>>>
>>
>> You mean for me to carry the seccomp part as well?
> 
> If that makes sense as far as the coordination, that's fine with me.
> Otherwise I'm not sure how x86 can build without having the seccomp
> changes in your tree.
> 

Exactly.  What I guess I'll do is set up a separate tip branch for this,
pull your branch into it, and then put the x86 patches on top.  Does
that make sense for everyone?

	-hpa