[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJcbSZEnPeCnkpc+uHmBWRJeaaw4TPy9HPkSGeriDb6mN6HR1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 10:53:41 -0700
From: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...omium.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@...ux.intel.com>, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 01/11] x86/crypto: Adapt assembly for PIE support
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 10:27 AM Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 09:54:44AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > I think there was some long-ago feedback from someone (Ingo?) about
> > giving context for the patch so looking at one individually would let
> > someone know that it was part of a larger series.
That's correct.
>
> Strange. But then we'd have to "mark" all patches which belong to a
> larger series this way, no? And we don't do that...
>
> > Do you think it should just be dropped in each patch?
>
> I think reading it once is enough. If the change alone in some commit
> message is not clear why it is being done - to support PIE - then sure,
> by all means. But slapping it everywhere...
I assume the last sentence could be removed in most cases.
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
> Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
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.
