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;
Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 21:03:03 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
        Christopher Li <sparse@chrisli.org>,
        Sparse Mailing-list <linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@pobox.com>,
        Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] compiler.h: give up __compiletime_assert_fallback()
Message-ID: <20180926190303.GA18293@kroah.com>
References: <84cf6ae0-97c8-6b73-ca86-b3d3b3daba5b@pobox.com>
 <CAKwvOdm7RrGpwk4LMFhsKx=5QMDoFAF8JX=RMZ9YXwOptDfhCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <8d5cf8c6-556a-96a1-610d-c92355783a9f@pobox.com>
 <CAKwvOdkD0cmF5373LRS92U--ptRvikSrG_oKyE-AiaybCQYMBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKwvOdnyA=Y_+KnJrDc5mu7twTAEOMXvb8cAZhwzsXTi7a9sEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180926180019.GD22824@google.com>
 <CAKwvOd=xYG+r4KU+QurUTyaxkPB2AMane4YfWxuvKtONvVtLxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGXu5jLBz1YanL5X4HFZjhb8NZe5QK=Q1ySfBkBDNWqEg4hs5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180926184259.GB14797@kroah.com>
 <CAGXu5jJaJ+1Sg3uwaZ8hzw3wFbiLrftpZDO8vdjY9_tB+P-HPQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAGXu5jJaJ+1Sg3uwaZ8hzw3wFbiLrftpZDO8vdjY9_tB+P-HPQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:45:19AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > I'm not digging up a compiler.h patch from a web site and adding it to
> > the tree this late in the release cycle.  Especially given that it
> > hasn't had any testing anywhere...
> 
> Good point about it not living in -next.
> 
> Who should be carrying these sorts of patches? In the past it's been
> Andrew or Masahiro, yes? For linux-next, maybe it can go via -mm?

Either is fine with me, as long as it isn't one of my trees :)

thanks,

greg k-h