[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1470332166.22643.133.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 13:36:06 -0400
From: Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>
To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Kees Cook
<keescook@...omium.org>, Jeff Vander Stoep <jeffv@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar
<mingo@...hat.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Alexander
Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jonathan
Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH 1/2] security, perf: allow
further restriction of perf_event_open
> My claim was not that the mainline code was impressively perfect, but
> rather that the vendor code was worse, countering a prior claim
> otherwise. Hence, reality.
You're arguing with a straw man.
I was responding to a comment about out-of-tree code, not generic
architecture perf drivers vs. alternative versions by SoC vendors.
Qualcomm and other vendors landing their drivers in mainline would be
nice, but it wouldn't make it inherently higher quality. I don't really
see what it has to do with this, which I why I responded...
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (852 bytes)
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.
