Re: [PATCH v26 00/28] riscv control-flow integrity for usermode
From: Zong Li <hidden>
Date: 2026-01-21 01:32:34
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-devicetree, linux-fsdevel, linux-kselftest, linux-mm, linux-riscv, lkml, rust-for-linux
On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 11:10 PM Deepak Gupta [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Paul, I have a bugfix for a bug reported by Jesse Huang (thanks Jesse) in riscv implementation of `map_shadow_stack`. Should I send a new series or only the bugfix-patch for implementation of `map_shadow_stack`
Hi Deepak, Not sure if I missed the bugfix patch, I couldn't find it on the mailing list. Could I know have you submitted it? If so, could you please point me where the patch is? Thanks
Let me know. Thanks. -Deepak -Deepak On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 10:33 AM Deepak Gupta [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 01:30:29AM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote:quoted
On Thu, 11 Dec 2025, Deepak Gupta via B4 Relay wrote:quoted
v26: CONFIG_RISCV_USER_CFI depends on CONFIG_MMU (dependency of shadow stack on MMU). Used b4 to pick tags, apparantly it messed up some tag picks. Fixing itDeepak: I'm now (at least) the third person to tell you to stop resending this entire series over and over again.To be very honest I also feel very bad doing and DOSing the lists. Sorry to you and everyone else. But I have been sitting on this patch series for last 3-4 merge windows with patches being exactly same/similar. So I have been a little more than desperate to get it in. I really haven't had any meaningful feedback on patch series except stalling just before each merge window for reasons which really shouldn't stall its merge. Sure that's the nature of open source development and it's maintainer's call at the end of the day. And I am new to this. I'll improve.quoted
First, a modified version of the CFI v23 series was ALREADY SITTING IN LINUX-NEXT. So there's no reason you should be resending the entire series, UNLESS your intention for me is to drop the entire existing series and wait for another merge window. Second: when someone asks you questions about an individual patch, and you want to answer those questions, it's NOT GOOD for you to resend the entire 28 series as the response! You are DDOSing a bunch of lists and E-mail inboxes. Just answer the question in a single E-mail. If you want to update a single patch, just send that one patch.Noted. I wasn't sure about it. I'll explicitly ask next time if you want me to send another one.quoted
If you don't start paying attention to these rules then people are going to start ignoring you -- at best! -- and it's going to give the entire community a bad reputation.Even before this, this patch series has been ignored largely. I don't know how to get attention. All I wanted was either feedback or get it in. And as I said I've been desparate to get it in. Also as I said, I'll improve.quoted
Please acknowledge that you understand this,ACKed.quoted
- Paul