lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/KASLR/64: Determine kernel text mapping size at runtime
On 12/11/16 at 01:06pm, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 06:58:29PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > For arguing and defending myself, I couldn't be very objective.
>
> Yeah, it is mind-boggling the amount of bullshit you would come up with
> instead of simply saying, "no, I don't have a good reason and use case
> for my patch". It made me laugh, FWIW. Especially the bit about people
> getting naked - I had to go check we're still talking about the same
> thing.

Yes, I can't agree more, that use case is totally of bullshit. At the
very beginning, we all know that this patch is trying to fix the
inconsistency between kaslr codes not compiled in and code compiled in
but with "nokaslr" specified. In short, this patch is fixing an
inconsistency, no bug is reported yet. Here the inconsistency is the
reason for this patch. I think it has been made very clearly now. This
also has been pointed out by Kees when he offered his "Acked-by". I
welcome and treat all comments seriously, no other choices are given
to me.


If at the start, you said straightforwardly like:

"No bug, no fix!"

"A little inconsistency makes the world more exciting, it can make me
high."

or
"We can leave with it until a bug is reported, remaining 1G is no harm."

I can accept it totally and mute. But I didn't hear them. As an expert of
x86 arch and authority, you honor me to step in and give comments, I
have to reply with respect.

I am very glad to see you said you laughed at something, whatever it is
for, at least it means thing is not screwed up thoroughly, laughter is
always good.

Thanks
Baoquan

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-12-12 03:32    [W:0.044 / U:7.316 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site