From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752382AbdFSWMZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:12:25 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f169.google.com ([209.85.223.169]:33277 "EHLO mail-io0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750903AbdFSWMY (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:12:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170619145049.38dc14030059786ef6ca6a54@linux-foundation.org> References: <1497903987-21002-1-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org> <20170619145049.38dc14030059786ef6ca6a54@linux-foundation.org> From: Kees Cook Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:12:22 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5bxb_YMxtDZalaWOIm2vGkEPxyk Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE To: Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell Cc: LKML , Daniel Micay Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:26:20 -0700 Kees Cook wrote: > >> Here are the outstanding fixes for CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE, along with Daniel's >> v5 patch and a tweak from me to add CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_FORTIFY_SOURCE to avoid >> failing the build on architectures that have not hunted down all the needed >> fixes yet. >> >> This was in my for-next/kspp tree, but since it depends on fixes in other >> trees, the preference is for these to all get carried in -mm instead of >> in KSPP. > > All the patches you sent are already in -next (from the kspp tree?) so > I can't use them. Err... that's what you asked me to send? And I had removed them from kspp so you could carry them. >> The extra needed fixes in -next are: >> >> scsi: csiostor: Avoid content leaks and casts >> arm64, vdso: Define vdso_{start,end} as array >> staging/rts5208: Fix read overflow in memcpy >> libertas: Avoid reading past end of buffer >> ray_cs: Avoid reading past end of buffer > > These didn't get sent out? These are all already in -next from other non-kspp trees. I was just trying to be complete about showing where all the needed fixes were. > If the kspp tree is already in -next then how about leaving things that > way, and send Linus a pull request for -rc1? *sob* I'm happy to do that. I just want you and sfr to agree. :P If I carry them in my kspp tree, it'll depend on -next (which I'm fine with, but sfr does not like). I can add it all back to kspp, just let me what you both can agree on. :P -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security