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:   Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:49:35 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Paul Elliott <paul.elliott@arm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>,
        Amit Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>,
        Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>,
        "H . J . Lu " <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
        Kristina =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C5=A1enko?= <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        Sudakshina Das <sudi.das@arm.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/11] ELF: UAPI and Kconfig additions for ELF program
 properties
Message-ID: <202002252147.7BFF9EE@keescook>
References: <20200212192906.53366-1-broonie@kernel.org>
 <20200212192906.53366-2-broonie@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200212192906.53366-2-broonie@kernel.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 07:28:56PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> 
> Pull the basic ELF definitions relating to the
> NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note from Yu-Cheng Yu's earlier x86 shstk
> series.

Both BTI and SHSTK depend on this. If BTI doesn't land soon, can this
and patch 2 land separately? I don't like seeing the older version in
the SHSTK series -- I worry there will be confusion and the BTI version
(which is more up to date) will get missed.

What's left to land BTI support?

-- 
Kees Cook