linux-kernel - Re: Trial of conflict resolution of Alan's patch

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:   Fri, 16 Feb 2018 10:18:34 -0500 (EST)
From:   Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:     Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <mingo@...nel.org>,
        <parri.andrea@...il.com>, <will.deacon@....com>,
        <peterz@...radead.org>, <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        <npiggin@...il.com>, <dhowells@...hat.com>, <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>, Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Subject: Re: Trial of conflict resolution of Alan's patch

On Fri, 16 Feb 2018, Akira Yokosawa wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> My forward-port patch doesn't apply to the "lkmm" branch.
> It looks like "linux-kernel-hardware.cat" is intentionally omitted there.
> Am I guessing right?
> 
> If this is the case, I can prepare a patch to be applied to "lkmm".
> But I can't compose a proper change log. So I'd like Alan to post
> a patch with my SOB appended. Does this approach sound reasonable?

The patch is not yet ready to be merged.  At the very least, I need to
include an update to explanation.txt along with it.  When it is all 
ready, I will rebase it on Paul's repository and post it.

Which reminds me: Now that the material has been accepted into the 
kernel, do we need to keep the github repository?  It has the 
linux-kernel-hardware.cat file, but otherwise it seems to be redundant.

Alan