Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210205163752.11932-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
 <20210205210610.29837-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> <161255976138.12021.9385501710085642237@build.alporthouse.com>
 <202102051319.E5D8B4528D@keescook> <161256053234.12021.17815864250035077266@build.alporthouse.com>
In-Reply-To: <161256053234.12021.17815864250035077266@build.alporthouse.com>
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Date:   Fri, 5 Feb 2021 22:48:16 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKMK7uHmG-WaYrLyHfcbJJ_LhKA2dOdvBAYKaAyD-s6W0TgRjg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kernel: Expose SYS_kcmp by default
To:     Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 10:28 PM Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Quoting Kees Cook (2021-02-05 21:20:33)
> > On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 09:16:01PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > The subject should of course be changed, as it is no longer being
> > > enabled by default.
> >
> > "default n" is redundant.
>
> I thought being explicit would be preferred. There are a few other
> default n, so at least it's not the odd-one-out!
>
> > I thought Daniel said CONFIG_DRM needed to
> > "select" it too, though?
>
> Yes. We will need to select it for any DRM driver so that the Vulkan/GL
> stacks can rely on having SYS_kcmp. That deserves to be handled and
> explain within drm/Kconfig, and as they are already shipping with calls
> to SYS_kcmp we may have to ask for a stable backport.

Oh I dreamed and thought it's part of this patch already. So v3 with
matching subject to enabled it for drm?
-Daniel

>
> > Otherwise, yeah, this looks good. Was the
> > export due to the 0-day bot failure reports?
>
> Yes.
> -Chris


-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch