Features backports
Hi,
as you probably know, the more features we backport, the higher will be the maintenance cost overtime so as a strategy, we need to be very conservative.
I sent a mail some days ago about the features backported already by Linaro for their LSK (Linaro Stable Kernel) for your evaluation. I bring today some potential backports related with security features and hardware support that has been identified by Ben H.
* UBSAN support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/c6d308534aef6c99904bf5862066360ae067abc4>
* Increased user-space ASLR range for ARM:
<https://lwn.net/Articles/667790/>
* Page poisoning on free:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/8823b1dbc05fab1a8bec275eeae4709257c2661d>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/1414c7f4f7d72d138fff35f00151d15749b5beda>
* SLAB/SLUB freelist randomisation
* Hardened usercopy
* Do Members use SLUB? if not, we should take a look at KASAN support for SLAB
* drm/tilcdc update? (many bug fixes post-4.4)
* AM33xx RTC support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/461932dfb54ebaf7da438fd8b769a01ce97a9360>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/b5a553c08bec14a058501df3fa6eb39f63f00a98>
Best Regards
Signature · 3 lines
Agustin Benito Bethencourt Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
Quoted 28 lines · Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Hi,
as you probably know, the more features we backport, the higher will be the maintenance cost overtime so as a strategy, we need to be very conservative.
I sent a mail some days ago about the features backported already by Linaro for their LSK (Linaro Stable Kernel) for your evaluation. I bring today some potential backports related with security features and hardware support that has been identified by Ben H.
* UBSAN support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/c6d308534aef6c99904bf5862066360ae067abc4>* Increased user-space ASLR range for ARM:
<https://lwn.net/Articles/667790/>* Page poisoning on free:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/8823b1dbc05fab1a8bec275eeae4709257c2661d>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/1414c7f4f7d72d138fff35f00151d15749b5beda>* SLAB/SLUB freelist randomisation
* Hardened usercopy
* Do Members use SLUB? if not, we should take a look at KASAN support for SLAB
Quoted 7 lines
* drm/tilcdc update? (many bug fixes post-4.4)
* AM33xx RTC support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/461932dfb54ebaf7da438fd8b769a01ce97a9360>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/b5a553c08bec14a058501df3fa6eb39f63f00a98>
To add two features areas from our requirement list:
- Distributed Switch Architecture, basically the level of 4.8 would be sufficient. However, there might be too many dependencies on networking core changes. If we pick 4.9 as next SLTS, then this becomes obsolete.
- Graphic support for AM57xx from more recent kernels, but things may even still depend on TI's vendor kernel (in which case it would be too early).
Both are a bit vague yet, but I'm trying to clarify more details. Comments are already welcome, of course.
Jan
Hi,
Quoted 44 lines · Jan Kiszka
Quoted 28 lines · Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Hi,
as you probably know, the more features we backport, the higher will be the maintenance cost overtime so as a strategy, we need to be very conservative.
I sent a mail some days ago about the features backported already by Linaro for their LSK (Linaro Stable Kernel) for your evaluation. I bring today some potential backports related with security features and hardware support that has been identified by Ben H.
* UBSAN support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/c6d308534aef6c99904bf5862066360ae067abc4>* Increased user-space ASLR range for ARM:
<https://lwn.net/Articles/667790/>* Page poisoning on free:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/8823b1dbc05fab1a8bec275eeae4709257c2661d>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/1414c7f4f7d72d138fff35f00151d15749b5beda>* SLAB/SLUB freelist randomisation
* Hardened usercopy
* Do Members use SLUB? if not, we should take a look at KASAN support for SLAB
Quoted 7 lines
* drm/tilcdc update? (many bug fixes post-4.4)
* AM33xx RTC support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/461932dfb54ebaf7da438fd8b769a01ce97a9360>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/b5a553c08bec14a058501df3fa6eb39f63f00a98>To add two features areas from our requirement list:
- Distributed Switch Architecture, basically the level of 4.8 would be sufficient. However, there might be too many dependencies on networking core changes. If we pick 4.9 as next SLTS, then this becomes obsolete.
Quoted 6 lines
- Graphic support for AM57xx from more recent kernels, but things may even still depend on TI's vendor kernel (in which case it would be too early).
Both are a bit vague yet, but I'm trying to clarify more details. Comments are already welcome, of course.
This is good. It allows us to dig a little and provide some light.
Quoted 7 lines
Jan
_______________________________________________
cip-dev mailing list
cip-dev at lists.cip-project.org
https://lists.cip-project.org/mailman/listinfo/cip-dev
Signature · 3 lines
Agustin Benito Bethencourt Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
Hi,
Regarding to Altera Socfpga Cyclone V, we might want to backport from 4.9;
- L2cache ECC(./arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c)
- QSPI Flash controller(drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c)
4.9 is still missing the followings which exist in the verdor tree(linux-socfpga);
- HPS2FPGA(drivers/fpga/altera-hps2fpga.c)
- NAND Flash controller(drivers/mtd/nand/denali_dt.c)
I hope we can encourage Altera to push these features upstream or do it ourselves.
Takuo
Quoted 55 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org [mailto:cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org] On Behalf Of Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 9:26 PM
To: cip-dev at lists.cip-project.org
Subject: [!][cip-dev] Features backportsHi,
as you probably know, the more features we backport, the higher will be the maintenance cost overtime so as a strategy, we need to be very conservative.
I sent a mail some days ago about the features backported already by Linaro for their LSK (Linaro Stable Kernel) for your evaluation. I bring today some potential backports related with security features and hardware support that has been identified by Ben H.
* UBSAN support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/c6d308534aef6c99904bf5862066360ae067abc4Quoted 1 line
* Increased user-space ASLR range for ARM:
<https://lwn.net/Articles/667790/>* Page poisoning on free:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/8823b1dbc05fab1a8bec275eeae4709257c2661
d>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/1414c7f4f7d72d138fff35f00151d15749b5beda>* SLAB/SLUB freelist randomisation
* Hardened usercopy
* Do Members use SLUB? if not, we should take a look at KASAN support for SLAB
* drm/tilcdc update? (many bug fixes post-4.4)
* AM33xx RTC support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/461932dfb54ebaf7da438fd8b769a01ce97a9360
Quoted 1 line
,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/b5a553c08bec14a058501df3fa6eb39f63f00a98>
Best Regards
--
Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
_______________________________________________
cip-dev mailing list
cip-dev at lists.cip-project.org
https://lists.cip-project.org/mailman/listinfo/cip-dev
Hi,
Quoted 10 lines · ???? / KOGUCHI?TAKUO
Hi,
Regarding to Altera Socfpga Cyclone V, we might want to backport from 4.9;
- L2cache ECC(./arch/arm/mm/cache-l2x0.c)
- QSPI Flash controller(drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c)4.9 is still missing the followings which exist in the verdor tree(linux-socfpga);
- HPS2FPGA(drivers/fpga/altera-hps2fpga.c)
- NAND Flashcontroller(drivers/mtd/nand/denali_dt.c)
I hope we can encourage Altera to push these features upstream or do it ourselves.
I think we have a good chance once they see we are testing Beaglebone Black in the open. That would be a good opportunity we might add value to them.
Definitely I would talk to them before. If they are not pushing the patches upstream, it would be a good question why.
Quoted 60 lines
Takuo
Quoted 55 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org [mailto:cip-dev-bounces at lists.cip-project.org] On Behalf Of Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 9:26 PM
To: cip-dev at lists.cip-project.org
Subject: [!][cip-dev] Features backportsHi,
as you probably know, the more features we backport, the higher will be the maintenance cost overtime so as a strategy, we need to be very conservative.
I sent a mail some days ago about the features backported already by Linaro for their LSK (Linaro Stable Kernel) for your evaluation. I bring today some potential backports related with security features and hardware support that has been identified by Ben H.
* UBSAN support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/c6d308534aef6c99904bf5862066360ae067abc4Quoted 1 line
* Increased user-space ASLR range for ARM:
<https://lwn.net/Articles/667790/>* Page poisoning on free:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/8823b1dbc05fab1a8bec275eeae4709257c2661
d>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/1414c7f4f7d72d138fff35f00151d15749b5beda>* SLAB/SLUB freelist randomisation
* Hardened usercopy
* Do Members use SLUB? if not, we should take a look at KASAN support for SLAB
* drm/tilcdc update? (many bug fixes post-4.4)
* AM33xx RTC support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/461932dfb54ebaf7da438fd8b769a01ce97a9360
Quoted 1 line
,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/b5a553c08bec14a058501df3fa6eb39f63f00a98>
Best Regards
--
Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
_______________________________________________
cip-dev mailing list
cip-dev at lists.cip-project.org
https://lists.cip-project.org/mailman/listinfo/cip-dev
Signature · 3 lines
Agustin Benito Bethencourt Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
Hi,
Since the Intel Apollo Lake has already released, we started to check the patches for that. I think the basic functionality has already upstreamed and it might be enough for expected use cases.
http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/linux-yocto-4.4/log/?h=standard/intel/bxt-rebase
I continue to clarify more details.
Best regards,
Yoshi
Quoted 31 lines · Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Hi,
as you probably know, the more features we backport, the higher will be the maintenance cost overtime so as a strategy, we need to be very conservative.
I sent a mail some days ago about the features backported already by Linaro for their LSK (Linaro Stable Kernel) for your evaluation. I bring today some potential backports related with security features and hardware support that has been identified by Ben H.
* UBSAN support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/c6d308534aef6c99904bf5862066360ae067abc4>* Increased user-space ASLR range for ARM:
<https://lwn.net/Articles/667790/>* Page poisoning on free:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/8823b1dbc05fab1a8bec275eeae4709257c2661d>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/1414c7f4f7d72d138fff35f00151d15749b5beda>* SLAB/SLUB freelist randomisation
* Hardened usercopy
* Do Members use SLUB? if not, we should take a look at KASAN support for SLAB
* drm/tilcdc update? (many bug fixes post-4.4)
* AM33xx RTC support:
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/461932dfb54ebaf7da438fd8b769a01ce97a9360>,
<https://git.kernel.org/linus/b5a553c08bec14a058501df3fa6eb39f63f00a98>Best Regards