Hi Andrew,

(I don't know who to pick on sorry)

On 05/12/2011 04:50 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:

It turns out that strict user copy checks (also known as
CONFIG_DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS) isn't actually implemented
on x86_64 and thus we aren't catching potential security holes
at compile time.

This series adds support for strict user copy checks on x86_64
and silences all the benign warnings in the x86_64 allyesconfig.

The final patch consolidates the config option as its duplicated
across mutliple arches. I don't know what tree this series should
go through so I tried to send the individual driver patches to the
respective maintainers.

Stephen Boyd (9):
  iwlegacy: Silence DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS=y warning
  iwlwifi: Silence DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS=y warning
  [SCSI] lpfc: Silence DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS=y warning
  debugfs: Silence DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS=y warning
  kprobes: Silence DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS=y warning
  Bluetooth: Silence DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS=y warning
  ASoC: Silence DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS=y warning
  x86: Implement strict user copy checks for x86_64
  Consolidate CONFIG_DEBUG_STRICT_USER_COPY_CHECKS

It looks like 1, 2, 4, 6, and 7 got picked up. Should I resend the left
over patches with appropriate acked-bys and tags? Would it be
appropriate to push this through your tree?

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.