Hi Paul! I guess stuff like Spectre/Meltdown can turn 1-2 days into months. ;-)
I did not want to distract you too much from that work, but you'll notice I've sent an updated patch series against 4.16-rc7, aiming at 4.17 [1] (it should be in your inbox). I would really appreciate if you can find time to provide feedback on that version. Congratulations on the wedding! Thanks, Mathieu [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected] ----- On Nov 14, 2017, at 4:32 PM, Paul Turner [email protected] wrote: > I have some comments that apply to many of the threads. > I've been fully occupied with a wedding and a security issue; but I'm > about to be free to spend the majority of my time on RSEQ things. > I was sorely hoping that day would be today. But it's looking like > I'm still a day or two from being free for this. > Thank you for the extensive clean-ups and user-side development. I > have some updates on these topics also. > > - Paul > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Linus Torvalds >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Here is the last RFC round of the updated rseq patchset containing: >>> >>> Andy? You were the one with concerns here and said you'd have >>> something else ready for comparison. >>> >> >> I had a long discussion with Mathieu and KS and I think that this is a >> good compromise. I haven't reviewed the series all that carefully, >> but I think the idea is sound. >> >> Basically, event_counter is gone (to be re-added in a later kernel if >> it really ends up being necessary, but it looks like it may primarily >> be a temptation to write subtly incorrect user code and to see >> scheduling details that shouldn't be readily exposed rather than a >> genuinely useful feature) and the versioning mechanism for the asm >> critical section bit is improved. My crazy proposal should be doable >> on top of this if there's demand and if anyone wants to write the >> gnarly code involved. >> >> IOW no objection from me as long as those changes were made, which I > > *think* they were. Mathieu? -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
