On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 05:30:17PM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote: > On 03/03/2016 03:38 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 01:02:27PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >>> > >>> Mark Rutland (3): > >>> kasan: add functions to clear stack poison > >>> sched/kasan: remove stale KASAN poison after hotplug > >>> arm64: kasan: clear stale stack poison > >>> > >>> arch/arm64/kernel/sleep.S | 4 ++++ > >>> include/linux/kasan.h | 6 +++++- > >>> kernel/sched/core.c | 3 +++ > >>> mm/kasan/kasan.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> Looks good to me - via which tree would you like to see this merged > >> upstream? > > > > I'd prefer the arm64 tree as arm64 is (the most) affected by the issue > > in practice. > > > > I'm happy for this to go via another tree if that's simpler; I'm not > > aware of anything that's likely to conflict in the arm64 tree. > > > > Catalin, Andrey, Andrew, any preference? > > > > I don't have any. arm64 tree is fine by me. > > For the patchset: > > Reviewed-by: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabi...@virtuozzo.com> >
Cheers! Following [1], I intend to change patch 1 to start at task_stack_page(t) rather than task_thread_info(task) + 1, to keep things simple. I assume that your Reviewed-by would still apply in that case? Thanks, Mark. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/3/2/428
