Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751851AbaJOWKA (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:10:00 -0400 Received: from gw-1.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.217]:35153 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750792AbaJOWJ7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:09:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 23:09:43 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Kees Cook Cc: Paolo Pisati , Jason Baron , David Miller , Laura Abbott , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , LKML Subject: Re: arm: JUMP_LABEL and DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX should be mutually exclusive? Message-ID: <20141015220943.GK27405@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20141015122102.GB4427@stinkpad> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:34:17AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:21 AM, Paolo Pisati wrote: > > Hi, > > > > i keep hitting this with BRIDGE=m, JUMP_LABEL=y and DEBUG_SET_MODULE_RONX=y: > > I think my RO/NX patch series solves this. I sent a pull request, but > I haven't seen any movement on it. :( Sorry Kees. However, even if I had looked at it, I would /not/ have been able to pull it. It does the absolutely fatal thing for any pull request: The following changes since commit cc31d8f887953e9824c4d9333b15c335ee7d1b65: Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes' and 'misc' into for-next (2014-09-2+6 14:40:19 +0100) That commit is on my "for-next" branch. The clue is in the name. :) Just like trying to base commits onto the linux-next tree, trying to base commits on an aggregate branch intended for linux-next usage doesn't work for all the same reasons. The commit which ultimately ended up being merged was: commit d5d16892243e7755da706d03b34da85ea6a74117 Merge: 3467e765a592 ad684dce87fa f3354ab67476 421520ba9829 Author: Russell King Date: Thu Oct 2 21:47:02 2014 +0100 Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes', 'l2c' (early part) and 'misc' into for-next compared to the one you based on: commit cc31d8f887953e9824c4d9333b15c335ee7d1b65 Merge: 3467e765a592 5ca918e5e3f9 e16343c47e42 Author: Russell King Date: Fri Sep 26 14:40:19 2014 +0100 Merge branches 'fiq' (early part), 'fixes' and 'misc' into for-next So, although "fiq" was the same, "fixes" had additional commits added, an additional "l2c" branch was added, and two additional commits in "misc". The reason why I publish a "for-next" branch is exactly so I don't have to push out lots of individual branches, and then have to tell SFR which branches he needs to pull on a regular basis. "for-next" is an aggregate unstable branch solely intended to be pulled into linux-next (and thus inspected by others.) -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/