linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.18 24/58] Input: atakbd

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:   Wed, 10 Oct 2018 15:02:35 -0400
From:   Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...il.com>,
        "3.8+" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>,
        alexander.levin@...rosoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.18 24/58] Input: atakbd - fix Atari CapsLock
 behaviour

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:58:20AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:49:47PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:40:39AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 08:28:40PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:11:48PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> > > > I think Greg's last estimate was that about 1/3 of the kernels in the
>> > > > wild are custom based on a kernel.org stable kernel, which means that we
>> > > > have no visibility as to what they do with the kernel. If you don't know
>> > > > who your users are, how can you prioritize some subsystems over others?
>> > >
>> > > The numbers I had was 75% of the images a major cloud provider was using
>> > > was either a kernel.org stable kernel release, or Debian.  The remaining
>> > > 25% was an "enterprise" kernel including CentOS.
>> > >
>> > > Also note that all Android devices are now required to follow the stable
>> > > kernel releases as well, so add a few more million to that number :)
>> > >
>> > > That being said, for a well-maintained subsystem like Input, whose
>> > > maintainer almost always marks patches for stable releases, having them
>> > > picked up by the autobot is unusual.  Dmitry, if you want your subsytem
>> > > to be excluded, just let Sasha know, other subsystems have been excluded
>> > > at the maintainer's request, and that's fine.
>> >
>> > I am hesitant to request to exclude input from autosel just yet, on an
>> > account that I might miss something. But I would like autosel to acquire
>> > more smarts and be less trigger happy. I think it would be for the best
>> > for everyone.
>>
>> Keep in mind that it learns based on your choices, so maybe in a while
>> it will be a perfect fit :)
>>
>> Maybe to make it easier, just reply with NAK on the patch(es) you don't
>> want in the tree and I'll drop them.
>
>OK, I will be doing it then. Should it be a certain string so you can
>script or a free form?

Nah, I go through any comments I receive and am not planning on changing
that.

>>
>> I was discussing more about the general case and stable tree policy
>> rather than drivers/input and AUTOSEL, and didn't mean to try and
>> dictate what we'll take or not. Sorry!
>
>Me too and I am not trying to be dismissive of your effort, I am just
>trying to have discussion on the criteria that we should use for stable
>candidates.

This is great input for me as well. Thank you!

--
Thanks,
Sasha