linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] z3fold fixes

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:   Tue, 29 Nov 2016 17:33:19 -0500
From:   Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>
To:     Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] z3fold fixes

On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com> wrote:
> Here come 2 patches with z3fold fixes for chunks counting and locking. As commit 50a50d2 ("z3fold: don't fail kernel build is z3fold_header is too big") was NAK'ed [1], I would suggest that we removed that one and the next z3fold commit cc1e9c8 ("z3fold: discourage use of pages that weren't compacted") and applied the coming 2 instead.

Instead of adding these onto all the previous ones, could you redo the
entire z3fold series?  I think it'll be simpler to review the series
all at once and that would remove some of the stuff from previous
patches that shouldn't be there.

If that's ok with Andrew, of course, but I don't think any of the
z3fold patches have been pushed to Linus yet.

>
> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com>
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/25/595