* Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20
[not found] ` <20190220095252.GA9089@linux.intel.com>
@ 2019-02-20 9:58 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-02-20 10:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jarkko Sakkinen @ 2019-02-20 9:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhangshaokun, ard.biesheuvel, zohar
Cc: Stephen Rothwell, Linux Next Mailing List, Roberto Sassu,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-efi, linux-integrity
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:11:15PM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote:
> > There is a compiler failure on arm64 platform, as follow:
> >
> > AS arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.o
> > CC kernel/trace/ring_buffer.o
> > In file included from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:0:
> > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:176:7: error: redeclaration of enumerator ‘NONE’
> > hook(NONE) \
> > ^
> > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:188:34: note: in definition of macro ‘__ima_hook_enumify’
> > #define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
> > ^
> > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:191:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__ima_hooks’
> > __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
> > ^
> > In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h:15:0,
> > from ./include/acpi/acpi_io.h:7,
> > from ./include/linux/acpi.h:47,
> > from ./include/linux/tpm.h:26,
> > from security/integrity/ima/ima.h:25,
> > from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:
> > ./include/linux/efi.h:1716:2: note: previous definition of ‘NONE’ was here
> > NONE,
> > ^
> > scripts/Makefile.build:276: recipe for target 'security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o' failed
> > make[3]: *** [security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o] Error 1
> >
> > I dug it and it is the commit 901615cb916d ("tpm: move tpm_chip definition to include/linux/tpm.h")
>
> This results from a new include in tpm.h:
>
> #include <linux/acpi.h>
>
> Must be fixed either in include/linux/efi.h or security/integrity/ima.h as
> those files have a name collision. Makes me wonder why neither has taken
> care of prefixing the constants properly.
Preferably both subsystems should be fixed with proper 'EFI_' and 'IMA_'
prefixes. Defining a constant named as NONE in a non-generic subsystem
(e.g. not part of the core data structures of Linux) and especially
exporting it to include/linux is not too well considered act.
/Jarkko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20
2019-02-20 9:58 ` linux-next: Tree for Feb 20 Jarkko Sakkinen
@ 2019-02-20 10:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-02-20 12:17 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-21 0:43 ` Zhangshaokun
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ard Biesheuvel @ 2019-02-20 10:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jarkko Sakkinen
Cc: Zhangshaokun, Mimi Zohar, Stephen Rothwell,
Linux Next Mailing List, Roberto Sassu,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-efi, linux-integrity
On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 10:58, Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:11:15PM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote:
> > > There is a compiler failure on arm64 platform, as follow:
> > >
> > > AS arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.o
> > > CC kernel/trace/ring_buffer.o
> > > In file included from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:0:
> > > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:176:7: error: redeclaration of enumerator ‘NONE’
> > > hook(NONE) \
> > > ^
> > > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:188:34: note: in definition of macro ‘__ima_hook_enumify’
> > > #define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
> > > ^
> > > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:191:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__ima_hooks’
> > > __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
> > > ^
> > > In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h:15:0,
> > > from ./include/acpi/acpi_io.h:7,
> > > from ./include/linux/acpi.h:47,
> > > from ./include/linux/tpm.h:26,
> > > from security/integrity/ima/ima.h:25,
> > > from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:
> > > ./include/linux/efi.h:1716:2: note: previous definition of ‘NONE’ was here
> > > NONE,
> > > ^
> > > scripts/Makefile.build:276: recipe for target 'security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o' failed
> > > make[3]: *** [security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o] Error 1
> > >
> > > I dug it and it is the commit 901615cb916d ("tpm: move tpm_chip definition to include/linux/tpm.h")
> >
> > This results from a new include in tpm.h:
> >
> > #include <linux/acpi.h>
> >
> > Must be fixed either in include/linux/efi.h or security/integrity/ima.h as
> > those files have a name collision. Makes me wonder why neither has taken
> > care of prefixing the constants properly.
>
> Preferably both subsystems should be fixed with proper 'EFI_' and 'IMA_'
> prefixes. Defining a constant named as NONE in a non-generic subsystem
> (e.g. not part of the core data structures of Linux) and especially
> exporting it to include/linux is not too well considered act.
>
Fixes for this have already been proposed, and should appear in -next shortly
The EFI one is here
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#label/linux-efi/FMfcgxwBVgrQRjglPkWRqRqVclGgVDnB
Not sure about the IMA one, Mimi should be able to comment ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20
2019-02-20 10:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel
@ 2019-02-20 12:17 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-21 0:43 ` Zhangshaokun
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Mimi Zohar @ 2019-02-20 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ard Biesheuvel, Jarkko Sakkinen, Anders Roxell
Cc: Zhangshaokun, Stephen Rothwell, Linux Next Mailing List,
Roberto Sassu, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-efi,
linux-integrity
> Fixes for this have already been proposed, and should appear in -next shortly
>
> The EFI one is here
> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#label/linux-efi/FMfcgxwBVgrQRjglPkWRqRqVclGgVDnB
>
> Not sure about the IMA one, Mimi should be able to comment ...
I've already commented on the other patch and was expecting to see a
revised patch.
Mimi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20
2019-02-20 10:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-02-20 12:17 ` Mimi Zohar
@ 2019-02-21 0:43 ` Zhangshaokun
2019-02-21 8:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Zhangshaokun @ 2019-02-21 0:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ard Biesheuvel, Jarkko Sakkinen
Cc: Mimi Zohar, Stephen Rothwell, Linux Next Mailing List,
Roberto Sassu, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-efi,
linux-integrity
Hi Ard,
On 2019/2/20 18:05, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 10:58, Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:11:15PM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote:
>>>> There is a compiler failure on arm64 platform, as follow:
>>>>
>>>> AS arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.o
>>>> CC kernel/trace/ring_buffer.o
>>>> In file included from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:0:
>>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:176:7: error: redeclaration of enumerator ‘NONE’
>>>> hook(NONE) \
>>>> ^
>>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:188:34: note: in definition of macro ‘__ima_hook_enumify’
>>>> #define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
>>>> ^
>>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:191:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__ima_hooks’
>>>> __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
>>>> ^
>>>> In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h:15:0,
>>>> from ./include/acpi/acpi_io.h:7,
>>>> from ./include/linux/acpi.h:47,
>>>> from ./include/linux/tpm.h:26,
>>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima.h:25,
>>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:
>>>> ./include/linux/efi.h:1716:2: note: previous definition of ‘NONE’ was here
>>>> NONE,
>>>> ^
>>>> scripts/Makefile.build:276: recipe for target 'security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o' failed
>>>> make[3]: *** [security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o] Error 1
>>>>
>>>> I dug it and it is the commit 901615cb916d ("tpm: move tpm_chip definition to include/linux/tpm.h")
>>>
>>> This results from a new include in tpm.h:
>>>
>>> #include <linux/acpi.h>
>>>
>>> Must be fixed either in include/linux/efi.h or security/integrity/ima.h as
>>> those files have a name collision. Makes me wonder why neither has taken
>>> care of prefixing the constants properly.
>>
>> Preferably both subsystems should be fixed with proper 'EFI_' and 'IMA_'
>> prefixes. Defining a constant named as NONE in a non-generic subsystem
>> (e.g. not part of the core data structures of Linux) and especially
>> exporting it to include/linux is not too well considered act.
>>
>
> Fixes for this have already been proposed, and should appear in -next shortly
>
> The EFI one is here
> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#label/linux-efi/FMfcgxwBVgrQRjglPkWRqRqVclGgVDnB
>
Because of no privilege, the website is denied for me. Anyway, it's nice to have been fixed.
Thanks,
Shaokun
> Not sure about the IMA one, Mimi should be able to comment ...
>
> .
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20
2019-02-21 0:43 ` Zhangshaokun
@ 2019-02-21 8:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-02-21 8:42 ` Zhangshaokun
2019-02-21 9:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2019-02-21 8:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhangshaokun
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel, Jarkko Sakkinen, Mimi Zohar, Stephen Rothwell,
Linux Next Mailing List, Roberto Sassu,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-efi, linux-integrity
Hi Shaokun,
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 1:45 AM Zhangshaokun <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> On 2019/2/20 18:05, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 10:58, Jarkko Sakkinen
> > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:11:15PM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote:
> >>>> There is a compiler failure on arm64 platform, as follow:
> >>>>
> >>>> AS arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.o
> >>>> CC kernel/trace/ring_buffer.o
> >>>> In file included from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:0:
> >>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:176:7: error: redeclaration of enumerator ‘NONE’
> >>>> hook(NONE) \
> >>>> ^
> >>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:188:34: note: in definition of macro ‘__ima_hook_enumify’
> >>>> #define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
> >>>> ^
> >>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:191:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__ima_hooks’
> >>>> __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
> >>>> ^
> >>>> In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h:15:0,
> >>>> from ./include/acpi/acpi_io.h:7,
> >>>> from ./include/linux/acpi.h:47,
> >>>> from ./include/linux/tpm.h:26,
> >>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima.h:25,
> >>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:
> >>>> ./include/linux/efi.h:1716:2: note: previous definition of ‘NONE’ was here
> >>>> NONE,
> >>>> ^
> >>>> scripts/Makefile.build:276: recipe for target 'security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o' failed
> >>>> make[3]: *** [security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o] Error 1
> >>>>
> >>>> I dug it and it is the commit 901615cb916d ("tpm: move tpm_chip definition to include/linux/tpm.h")
> >>>
> >>> This results from a new include in tpm.h:
> >>>
> >>> #include <linux/acpi.h>
> >>>
> >>> Must be fixed either in include/linux/efi.h or security/integrity/ima.h as
> >>> those files have a name collision. Makes me wonder why neither has taken
> >>> care of prefixing the constants properly.
> >>
> >> Preferably both subsystems should be fixed with proper 'EFI_' and 'IMA_'
> >> prefixes. Defining a constant named as NONE in a non-generic subsystem
> >> (e.g. not part of the core data structures of Linux) and especially
> >> exporting it to include/linux is not too well considered act.
> >>
> >
> > Fixes for this have already been proposed, and should appear in -next shortly
> >
> > The EFI one is here
> > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#label/linux-efi/FMfcgxwBVgrQRjglPkWRqRqVclGgVDnB
> >
>
> Because of no privilege, the website is denied for me. Anyway, it's nice to have been fixed.
Looks like Ard posted a link to a label in his personal gmail mailbox?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20
2019-02-21 8:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
@ 2019-02-21 8:42 ` Zhangshaokun
2019-02-21 9:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Zhangshaokun @ 2019-02-21 8:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Uytterhoeven
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel, Jarkko Sakkinen, Mimi Zohar, Stephen Rothwell,
Linux Next Mailing List, Roberto Sassu,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-efi, linux-integrity
Hi Geert,
On 2019/2/21 16:03, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Shaokun,
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 1:45 AM Zhangshaokun <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>> On 2019/2/20 18:05, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 10:58, Jarkko Sakkinen
>>> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:11:15PM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote:
>>>>>> There is a compiler failure on arm64 platform, as follow:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AS arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.o
>>>>>> CC kernel/trace/ring_buffer.o
>>>>>> In file included from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:0:
>>>>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:176:7: error: redeclaration of enumerator ‘NONE’
>>>>>> hook(NONE) \
>>>>>> ^
>>>>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:188:34: note: in definition of macro ‘__ima_hook_enumify’
>>>>>> #define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
>>>>>> ^
>>>>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:191:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__ima_hooks’
>>>>>> __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
>>>>>> ^
>>>>>> In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h:15:0,
>>>>>> from ./include/acpi/acpi_io.h:7,
>>>>>> from ./include/linux/acpi.h:47,
>>>>>> from ./include/linux/tpm.h:26,
>>>>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima.h:25,
>>>>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:
>>>>>> ./include/linux/efi.h:1716:2: note: previous definition of ‘NONE’ was here
>>>>>> NONE,
>>>>>> ^
>>>>>> scripts/Makefile.build:276: recipe for target 'security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o' failed
>>>>>> make[3]: *** [security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o] Error 1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I dug it and it is the commit 901615cb916d ("tpm: move tpm_chip definition to include/linux/tpm.h")
>>>>>
>>>>> This results from a new include in tpm.h:
>>>>>
>>>>> #include <linux/acpi.h>
>>>>>
>>>>> Must be fixed either in include/linux/efi.h or security/integrity/ima.h as
>>>>> those files have a name collision. Makes me wonder why neither has taken
>>>>> care of prefixing the constants properly.
>>>>
>>>> Preferably both subsystems should be fixed with proper 'EFI_' and 'IMA_'
>>>> prefixes. Defining a constant named as NONE in a non-generic subsystem
>>>> (e.g. not part of the core data structures of Linux) and especially
>>>> exporting it to include/linux is not too well considered act.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Fixes for this have already been proposed, and should appear in -next shortly
>>>
>>> The EFI one is here
>>> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#label/linux-efi/FMfcgxwBVgrQRjglPkWRqRqVclGgVDnB
>>>
>>
>> Because of no privilege, the website is denied for me. Anyway, it's nice to have been fixed.
>
> Looks like Ard posted a link to a label in his personal gmail mailbox?
>
Hmm, it seems that, my bad understanding.
Thanks your reply.
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20
2019-02-21 8:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-02-21 8:42 ` Zhangshaokun
@ 2019-02-21 9:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ard Biesheuvel @ 2019-02-21 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Uytterhoeven
Cc: Zhangshaokun, Jarkko Sakkinen, Mimi Zohar, Stephen Rothwell,
Linux Next Mailing List, Roberto Sassu,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-efi, linux-integrity
On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 09:04, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Shaokun,
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 1:45 AM Zhangshaokun <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> > On 2019/2/20 18:05, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 10:58, Jarkko Sakkinen
> > > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:11:15PM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote:
> > >>>> There is a compiler failure on arm64 platform, as follow:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> AS arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.o
> > >>>> CC kernel/trace/ring_buffer.o
> > >>>> In file included from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:0:
> > >>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:176:7: error: redeclaration of enumerator ‘NONE’
> > >>>> hook(NONE) \
> > >>>> ^
> > >>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:188:34: note: in definition of macro ‘__ima_hook_enumify’
> > >>>> #define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
> > >>>> ^
> > >>>> security/integrity/ima/ima.h:191:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__ima_hooks’
> > >>>> __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
> > >>>> ^
> > >>>> In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h:15:0,
> > >>>> from ./include/acpi/acpi_io.h:7,
> > >>>> from ./include/linux/acpi.h:47,
> > >>>> from ./include/linux/tpm.h:26,
> > >>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima.h:25,
> > >>>> from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:
> > >>>> ./include/linux/efi.h:1716:2: note: previous definition of ‘NONE’ was here
> > >>>> NONE,
> > >>>> ^
> > >>>> scripts/Makefile.build:276: recipe for target 'security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o' failed
> > >>>> make[3]: *** [security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o] Error 1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I dug it and it is the commit 901615cb916d ("tpm: move tpm_chip definition to include/linux/tpm.h")
> > >>>
> > >>> This results from a new include in tpm.h:
> > >>>
> > >>> #include <linux/acpi.h>
> > >>>
> > >>> Must be fixed either in include/linux/efi.h or security/integrity/ima.h as
> > >>> those files have a name collision. Makes me wonder why neither has taken
> > >>> care of prefixing the constants properly.
> > >>
> > >> Preferably both subsystems should be fixed with proper 'EFI_' and 'IMA_'
> > >> prefixes. Defining a constant named as NONE in a non-generic subsystem
> > >> (e.g. not part of the core data structures of Linux) and especially
> > >> exporting it to include/linux is not too well considered act.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Fixes for this have already been proposed, and should appear in -next shortly
> > >
> > > The EFI one is here
> > > https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#label/linux-efi/FMfcgxwBVgrQRjglPkWRqRqVclGgVDnB
> > >
> >
> > Because of no privilege, the website is denied for me. Anyway, it's nice to have been fixed.
>
> Looks like Ard posted a link to a label in his personal gmail mailbox?
>
Silly me.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=efi/core&id=5c418dc789a3898717ebf2caa5716ba91a7150b2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-02-21 9:12 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20190220184341.73bd2084@canb.auug.org.au>
[not found] ` <1114b964-8ff8-5632-64d4-e94a9160b998@hisilicon.com>
[not found] ` <20190220095252.GA9089@linux.intel.com>
2019-02-20 9:58 ` linux-next: Tree for Feb 20 Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-02-20 10:05 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-02-20 12:17 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-21 0:43 ` Zhangshaokun
2019-02-21 8:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-02-21 8:42 ` Zhangshaokun
2019-02-21 9:12 ` Ard Biesheuvel
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).