On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:02 AM Greg Hackmann wrote:
> Sami, what are the plans for upstreaming this work?
CFI is a clang-specific feature that depends on LTO. Based on the earlier
LTO discussion, we decided to collect some more evidence that clang's LTO
doesn't actually break anything in the ker
On 04/09/2018 04:41 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:57:51PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:49:37 +0200
>> Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>>> On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
>
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:57:51PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:49:37 +0200
> Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
> > On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> After this patchse
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:07:41 +0100
Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:57:51PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:49:37 +0200
> > Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >
> > > On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900,
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 12:25:07 +0200
Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On 9 Apr 2018, at 11:57, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:49:37 +0200
> > Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >
> >>> On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Bap
> On 9 Apr 2018, at 11:57, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
>
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:49:37 +0200
> Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
>>> On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
Hi,
After this patchset, a kernel bui
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:57:51PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:49:37 +0200
> Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
> > On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> After this patchse
On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:49:37 +0200
Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> After this patchset, a kernel built with CFI fails. Disabling
> >> UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0 fix the issue ob
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> After this patchset, a kernel built with CFI fails. Disabling
> UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0 fix the issue obviously.
>
> Wondering if there is one of the test suite used on the review
> patchset that covers the CFI usecase.
On 9 April 2018 at 11:30, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> After this patchset, a kernel built with CFI fails. Disabling
>> UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0 fix the issue obviously.
How does one 'build a kernel with CFI' for arm64?
>
> Is this
On 09/04/18 10:30, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> After this patchset, a kernel built with CFI fails. Disabling
>> UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0 fix the issue obviously.
>
> Is this a "clean" 4.9.93 tree or a "4.9.93 merged into
> android-c
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 06:05:34PM +0900, Jean-Baptiste Theou wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After this patchset, a kernel built with CFI fails. Disabling
> UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0 fix the issue obviously.
Is this a "clean" 4.9.93 tree or a "4.9.93 merged into
android-common-4.9?
> Wondering if there is one of th
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-palmas.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-palmas.txt
index caf297bee1fb..c28d4eb83b76 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-palmas.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctr
13 matches
Mail list logo