Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc:     Mark Wielaard <mjw@fedoraproject.org>,
        "H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>,
        Cary Coutant <ccoutant@gmail.com>, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
References: <20180329180112.11055-1-labbott@redhat.com>
 <1522413619.15770.88.camel@fedoraproject.org>
 <CAK7LNAR5ZtwWH1SPMJeVpPkB38+9FyZOAG4AmS7NQ8NqCo_t9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALCETrWNrk-5GPEamVSwtnTxCOV4foreRUu789ZcOzykd0DYPA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <42e86b87-b09e-c3e9-8328-7fa418efb627@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 May 2018 13:51:52 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrWNrk-5GPEamVSwtnTxCOV4foreRUu789ZcOzykd0DYPA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 05/07/2018 07:49 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 11:59 PM Masahiro Yamada <
> yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
> 
>> 2018-03-30 21:40 GMT+09:00 Mark Wielaard <mjw@fedoraproject.org>:
>>> On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>>> I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether
>>>> this would be acceptable for merging or if we should just persue a
>>>> --build-id-salt in binutils.
>>>
>>> Personally I would go with this approach. It seems simple and it might
>>> take years before a new linker option is available everywhere.
> 
> 
>> Indeed.  This series is easier than --build-id-salt.
> 
>> If you do not see any better solution, I can accept this.
> 
> 
>> BTW, when I read
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo
>> I thought "we could reverse the symlink direction from debug file to
>> build-id file)"
>> sensible (but I understand it is not easy to change this way).
> 
> 
>> If two packages share an identical image,
>> one package can borrow the image from the other,
>> then the storage space will be saved.
> 
>> So, having identical ID should be advantage,
>> but we actually see only disadvantage...
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>> To simplify things I think you could just always add the extra vdso
>>> .comment initialized to something like KERNELRELEASE. Which distros
>>> seem to update anyway to include their build number, so they wouldn't
>>> need to do anything special to "update the build salt".
>>>
> 
> That's what I was thinking, too.  Would that solve Fedora's problem?
> 

Yes, that seems reasonable.