linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] printk() fixes, optimizations, and clean ups

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 7 Dec 2012 16:58:18 +0100
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"\"Jan H." <schnhrr@...tu-berlin.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Sylvain Munaut <s.munaut@...tever-company.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] printk() fixes, optimizations, and clean ups

2012/12/7 Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>:
> On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 07:04 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 12:47:36PM +0100, "Jan H. Schönherr" wrote:
>> > Am 07.12.2012 03:51, schrieb Joe Perches:
>> > > On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 16:19 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> > >> On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 15:37:30 -0800
>> > >> Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>> > >>> Can you please pick this up for -next now and I'll
>> > >>> redo my patches against -next for -rc1 so I'm not
>> > >>> delayed until 3.9?
>> > >>
>> > >> It would be better to do things in the other order.
>> > >>
>> > >> a) Your patches perform mainly code-movement which doesn't cause
>> > >>    functional changes.  Jan's patches are functional changes which
>> > >>    require more thought and testing and possible fixups.
>> > >
>> > > Fine by me.  Jan?
>> >
>> > No problem.
>> >
>> > I agree with Andrew, that patches 9 to 14 could use indeed some
>> > more eyeballs.
>> >
>> > Patches 1 to 8 are more straight-forward, and I would consider
>> > these ready. However, they are also those, where I probably won't
>> > have any trouble rebasing them on top of your changes.
>> >
>> > Anyway. Until now I always thought my patches will end up in the
>> > queue of some maintainer, so that I don't have to bother about
>> > _when_ posting my patches. Therefore: when should I repost a
>> > version rebased on top of Joe's changes?
>>
>> You are correct, I'll end up queuing these up to my tree when 3.8-rc1 is
>> out,
>
> Andrew suggested I send my patches at -rc2.
>
>> they will live in linux-next until 3.8-final is out, and then go to
>> Linus for 3.9-rc1.  Right now, my trees are frozen due to the merge
>> window about to open up.  Your patience is appreciated.
>
> I think it'd be easier for a single downstream
> maintainer to coordinate these patch sets sequencing.
>
> You or Andrew might be better than you and Andrew.
>
> There is a small patch to printk that should likely
> be applied in some form for -rc1 or earlier:
>
> Sylvain Munaut's (cc'd) print_time fix:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1845971/
>
> I don't know of anything else that likely will
> or should be applied before -rc1.
>
> Frederic Weisbecker (also cc'd) has a printk nohz
> patch series that merits some consideration too.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/20/94
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/14/646
> I don't know if Ingo pulled it in somewhere or not.

He has not yet pulled. But it's ready to be pulled and is on linux-next.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/