Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Announcement for Linux 4.14 [1]: > No surprises this week, although it is probably worth pointing out how > the 0day robot has been getting even better (it was very useful > before, but Fengguang has been working on making it even better, and > reporting the problems it has found). > > Sure, some of the new reports turned out to be just 0day doing things > that just don't work (ie KASAN with old gcc versions, but also doing > things like loading old ISA drivers in situations that just don't make > sense - remember when you couldn't even ask if the hardware existed or > not, and just had to know), but even then it's been all good. > > The appended shortlog is obviously only for the (small) haul since > rc8, and it really is tiny. Not very many commits, and they are small. > The biggest thing that stands out in the diffstat is the > "leaking_addresses" perl script, which is actually under active > development, but I put the first version in for 4.14 just so that > people could see that initial state and start looking at the end > result and perhaps ask themselves "should my code make these kernel > addresses visible to user space". > > The actual changes will hopefully start percolating into 4.15, with > one notable llikely early change (which has been discussed extensively > on the list) being to just hash any "%p" addresses by default. We used > to have strict modes that just zeroed the address out, but that was > actually counter-productive, in that often people use the address as a > "kernel object identity" for debugging (or fro cross-correlation - > think network sockets), and so just clearing the pointer value makes > those kinds of uses pointless. But using a secure hash allows for > those kinds of identity uses, while not actually leaking the address > itself. > > (Other situations where the actual address is relevant then need other > approaches - we'll be restricting /proc/kallsyms only to entities that > actually need them etc etc). > > Anyway, apart from that one script, the rest of it really is > one-liners or "few-liners". > > The most noticeable last-minute change is probably that we had to > revert the code that showed a good MHz value in /proc/cpuinfo even for > the modern "CPU picks frequency dynamically" case. It worked fine, but > it was much too expensive on machines with tens or hundreds of CPU > cores. There's a cunning plan, but it didn't make 4.14, so we'll get > it working and then back-port. > > Anything else is pretty esoteric, you can just read the changelog.. > > And with this, the merge window for 4.15 is obviously open. As > mentioned in the late rc announcements, the extra week for rc8 means > that now Thanksgiving week ends up happening during the second half of > the merge window, and I'll be off on a family vacation. > > We'll see how that goes. > > I might decide that I'll extend the merge window if I feel that I > can't be responsive enough. > > Or maybe you guys won't even notice, because I _will_ have my laptop > and internet access. > > Or maybe I will just decide that 4.14 was a painful release, and any > late stragglers for 4.15 are not worth _another_ painful release, and > I'll just say "tough luck, you were late to the merge window, and I > felt more like being out in the sun than taking your second-week pull > request". > > Because it really would be lovely to have a smaller and calmer release for 4.15. > > Anyway, go out and test the new 4.14 release, that is slated to be the > next LTS kernel - and start sending me pull request for the 4.15 merge > window. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/12/123
- Loading branch information