From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F26C43387 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 03:18:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09A722075C for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 03:18:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tycho-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@tycho-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="OoCKftlD" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727143AbfAJDSp (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2019 22:18:45 -0500 Received: from mail-yw1-f65.google.com ([209.85.161.65]:46700 "EHLO mail-yw1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726834AbfAJDSp (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2019 22:18:45 -0500 Received: by mail-yw1-f65.google.com with SMTP id t13so3832362ywe.13 for ; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 19:18:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tycho-ws.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=HA5zyPOtM4vpmUe/kE+QiX1RJ0sEYJCbfLsl40THKV8=; b=OoCKftlDJzygWNgvYBaP3buuWxH7z7kBCjggWEKlvmRng4H5xLHD8HA8NApLxHswsU rNULTiMYdDNtIRKWJgWAf1J1OI3mGHNEECJiUXn8Y3s4NvJLUnjI5yIqFEmvtlX2IdVN CtE3TmImFz/bJlwavFuVkB40oCBFiv+hL5pE/1Uq/ktn2I4Yk7wo+te+vSwZFtSG9YPt vOy2xjHbe/dTou4DiQAWBz3A0G1TdAtmYCQPF4oL97FHz0scuHJhYXAzz7ZqedEnDWi6 Ae2srZWRUaciv+sbM0vvcs1VWFofrF+O6rfO0a1drTj34VxnenJeRvIYuLaOs+zFUgLO tOQw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=HA5zyPOtM4vpmUe/kE+QiX1RJ0sEYJCbfLsl40THKV8=; b=Kwt46+Bazv4s3R2UWFqVc824FC+Qm4ZavVCMBr/M3HDtgI/BU9jxUYVfpa/wRY1WqX SvQ6Fbk72rYy2kdCnwUwGVlFWpOg1cuVoLHxHYD9VTTZQXGrEtaR+B7ENDq1UKM3J4Yg jADCclCES4MNvmGEiTM+e2xIiyko4a0npJnFP0nrGLNIjHF96dWjeZRxV9uoJ7mt50Q3 0mKnaGrWkBe4XoTXi1jQRkm6EZjumnqWYLh9cWAJP5kRENMHXLuy5L0uDG9YuIAZcLie P5Oou2k1rYnaWOLjdJlYI5lB+ZT7eLznZdSwZlnUvbj3hOCgibnBe7JqE4BeTQPyXGcE zFtA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukfvjzzTJ7A5eIxYFg4NbPW05Mp1fmay1PTAv8S5sTqF8hFf9GeZ 37kzRdkD/BB3+WPgFTJJbo9rDw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN4VVPykalmlELDvfKbxQSHq+dg6kMh8zXnKySaMCMixApNQXY9r4fmQa9Hj8RvGTkkQ71IzsA== X-Received: by 2002:a81:320e:: with SMTP id y14mr8300727ywy.49.1547090323838; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 19:18:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from cisco ([128.107.241.175]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g84sm34846911ywg.9.2019.01.09.19.18.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 09 Jan 2019 19:18:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 20:18:39 -0700 From: Tycho Andersen To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Kees Cook , James Morris , Linus Torvalds , linux-security-module , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] seccomp: build fix for v5.0-rc2 Message-ID: <20190110031839.GD28330@cisco> References: <20190109065916.GA29753@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190109065916.GA29753@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 07:59:16AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Kees Cook wrote: > > > This was already picked up by x86-urgent... > > > > -Kees > > I'm fine with both routes - if Linus pulls this I'll zap the x86/urgent > one. The patches are different actually. I've confirmed the one in x86/urgent is correct, and this one is from the initial thread where I was just guessing. The difference is HOSTCFLAGS vs. HOSTLDFLAGS for .o files. So I think we should drop this and just keep the one in x86/urgent. Thanks, Tycho