netdev - Re: [GIT] Networking

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:   Thu, 31 Aug 2017 07:44:58 +0300
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     pavel@....cz, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking

David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:

> From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 20:31:31 +0300
>
>> AFAICS the bug was introduced by 9df86e2e702c6 back in 2010. If the bug
>> has been there for 7 years so waiting for a few more weeks should not
>> hurt.
>
> As a maintainer you have a right to handle bug fixing in that way, but
> certainly that is not how I would handle this.
>
> It's easy to validate this fix, it's extremely unlikely to cause
> a regression, and fixes a problem someone actually was able to
> trigger.
>
> Deferring to -next only has the side effect of making people wait
> longer for the fix.

Yeah, you are right there. I did actually ponder which I tree should
commit it back in July but due to various reasons decided differently.

-- 
Kalle Valo