On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 01:30:27PM +, P J P wrote:
> Hello Philippe, all
>
> >On Thursday, 9 September, 2021, 03:58:40 pm IST, Daniel P. Berrangé
> > wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 01:20:14AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> >> This series is experimental! The goal is to better limit
On Tuesday, 14 September, 2021, 07:00:27 pm IST, P J P
wrote:
>* Thanks so much for restarting this thread. I've been at it intermittently
>last few
> months, thinking about how could we annotate the source/module objects.
>
> -> [*] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-07/msg04642
Hello Philippe, all
>On Thursday, 9 September, 2021, 03:58:40 pm IST, Daniel P. Berrangé
> wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 01:20:14AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> This series is experimental! The goal is to better limit the
>> boundary of what code is considerated security critical, an
On 210909 0120, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This series is experimental! The goal is to better limit the
> boundary of what code is considerated security critical, and
> what is less critical (but still important!).
>
> This approach was quickly discussed few months ago with Markus
>
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 01:20:14AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This series is experimental! The goal is to better limit the
> boundary of what code is considerated security critical, and
> what is less critical (but still important!).
>
> This approach was quickly discussed few
Hi,
This series is experimental! The goal is to better limit the
boundary of what code is considerated security critical, and
what is less critical (but still important!).
This approach was quickly discussed few months ago with Markus
then Daniel. Instead of classifying the code on a file path
ba
