netdev - Re: system hang on start-up (mlx5?)

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, 2 Jun 2023 11:29:24 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>
Cc: Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
	"elic@...dia.com" <elic@...dia.com>,
	"saeedm@...dia.com" <saeedm@...dia.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
	linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: system hang on start-up (mlx5?)

On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 03:55:43PM +0200, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 02.06.23 15:38, Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > 
> >> On Jun 2, 2023, at 7:05 AM, Linux regression tracking #update (Thorsten Leemhuis) <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
> >>
> >> [TLDR: This mail in primarily relevant for Linux regression tracking. A
> >> change or fix related to the regression discussed in this thread was
> >> posted or applied, but it did not use a Link: tag to point to the
> >> report, as Linus and the documentation call for.
> > 
> > Linus recently stated he did not like Link: tags pointing to an
> > email thread on lore.
> 
> Afaik he strongly dislikes them when a Link: tag just points to the
> submission of the patch being applied;

He has said that, but AFAICT enough maintainers disagree that we are
still adding Link tags to the submission as a glorified Change-Id

When done well these do provide information because the cover letter
should back link to all prior version of the series and you can then
capture the entire discussion, although manually.

> at the same time he *really wants* those links if they tell the
> backstory how a fix came into being, which definitely includes the
> report about the issue being fixed (side note: without those links
> regression tracking becomes so hard that it's basically no
> feasible).

Yes, but this started to get a bit redundant as we now have

 Reported-by:  xx@...kaller

Which does identify the original bug and all its places, and now
people are adding links to the syzkaller email too because checkpatch
is complaining.

> > Also, checkpatch.pl is now complaining about Closes: tags instead
> > of Link: tags. A bug was never opened for this issue.
> 
> That was a change by somebody else, but FWIW, just use Closes: (instead
> of Link:) with a link to the report on lore, that tag is not reserved
> for bugs.
> 
> /me will go and update his boilerplate text used above

And now you say they should be closes not link?

Oy it makes my head hurt all these rules.

Jason