linux-kernel - Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review

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

Date:	Mon, 15 Jul 2013 09:52:38 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review

On Fri, 2013-07-12 at 10:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> You cut out the important part:
> 
>  - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
>    marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
>    security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, something
>    critical.
> 
> That list is not a "or" list, it's an "and" list - it needs to follow
> *all* the rules. The exception is the "New device IDs and quirks are
> also accepted", which maybe should be made more clearly separate.

So if I read this (and stable_kernel_rules.txt) correctly, that means that
for example, let's say, we find in RHEL66 or SLES42 (possibly following
a user report), for example, that PCI hotplug is broken with some category
of devices on some machines.

We do a fix, it's roughtly 4 or 5 lines, pretty self contained. We get it
into the distro.

That still doesn't qualify for stable right ? We have to start shooting at
every distro around separately or wait for users of those other distros
to also hit it ?

Where is the line when something "Doesn't work" (without crashing/oops'ing or
being a security issue) ?

My personal line so far has been to take it and send it to -stable if the
patch is simple enough and self contained (little risk of side effects).

But I can stop if that's indeed the accepted rule.

Cheers,
Ben.

--
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/