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;
Date:   Mon, 3 May 2021 23:12:35 -0500
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/uaccess: Use pointer masking to limit uaccess
 speculation
Message-ID: <20210504041235.25mq7il525oiimc6@treble>
References: <1d06ed6485b66b9f674900368b63d7ef79f666ca.1599756789.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com>
 <20200914195354.yghlqlwtqz7mqteb@treble>
 <20200923033848.GD3421308@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20210503233154.lhumcispdgj5dgaz@treble>
 <YJCVzX2aZmu8GaD/@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YJCVzX2aZmu8GaD/@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 12:31:09AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 06:31:54PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 04:38:48AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 02:53:54PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > > Al,
> > > > 
> > > > This depends on Christoph's set_fs() removal patches.  Would you be
> > > > willing to take this in your tree?
> > > 
> > > in #uaccess.x86 and #for-next
> > 
> > Hm, I think this got dropped somehow.   Will repost.
> 
> Ow...  #uaccess.x86 got dropped from -next at some point, mea culpa.
> What I have is b4674e334bb4; it's 5.8-based (well, 5.9-rc1).  It
> missed post-5.9 merge window and got lost.  Could you rebase to
> to more or less current tree and repost?

No problem, I'll refresh it against the latest.

-- 
Josh