[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612B41BF9AD4@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:02:15 +0000
From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
To: "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com"
<kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
CC: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC v2 PATCH 00/13] HARDENED_ATOMIC
>> - add missing tests for atomic64 and local
>> - rebase on top of latest linux-next
>> - compile test and test run the whole thing in different combinations
>> - send rfcv3 with also all atomic maintainers included for wider
>> blame/feedback
>>
>> Does it sound like a good plan for everyone?
>>
> Actually, it doesn't look like I've updated Documentation/security/hardened-atomic.txt yet. I need to fix the language explaining the x86 race condition to make it clear that we're discussing the SMP case.
> I also want to add a sentence somewhere (either in your cover letter or in the kernel documentation, or both), referencing the benchmark results and lack of demonstrable performance degradation.
David, could you please push the changes you want to do to the documentation in separate commit to the top of hardened_atomic_on_next?
I will cherry pick them to our new rebased branch hardened_atomic_next that we still working actively now.
Best Regards,
Elena.
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.
