On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Rusty Russell <ru...@rustcorp.com.au> wrote: > Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> writes: >> Why not just do this with 0-base-address detection like my v2? That >> would mean we don't need to remember to add this flag in the future to >> imagined new architectures that might want this 0-based per_cpu >> feature. > > Because future architectures will get this right and emit absolute > symbols. I hope! > > I'm swamped at the moment, but am hoping to investigate that for > x86-64. This is a stop-gap.
Okay, I'm convinced. :) Acked-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> Thanks! -Kees -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
