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  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, 16 Apr 2018 14:35:10 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
Cc:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 015/161] printk: Add console owner and
 waiter logic to load balance console writes

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:17:17 +0000
Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com> wrote:

> I thought we agreed that this is bad? We wanted users to be closer to
> mainline, and we can't do it without bringing -stable closer to mainline
> as well.

I guess the question comes down to, what do the users of stable kernels
want? For my machines, I always stay one or two releases behind
mainline. Right now my kernels are on 4.15.x, and will probably jump to
4.16.x the next time I upgrade my machines. I'm fine with something
breaking every so often as long as it's not data corruption (although I
have lots of backups of my systems in case that happens, just a PITA to
fix it). I only hit bugs on these boxes probably once a year at most in
doing so. But I mostly do what other kernel developers do and that
means the bugs I would mostly hit, other developers hit before their
code is released.

Thus, if stable users are fine with being regression compatible with
mainline, then I'm fine with it too.

-- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ