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:	Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:28:58 -0500
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>,
	sct@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] fs/jbd/journal.c: cleanups

On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 03:12:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> If me resending this old patch collides with something finally getting a 
> user this part of my patch shouldn't be applied now (but you might get 
> it again in 6 months if it's still unused...).
> 
> But generally such conflicts would become visible if "known development 
> trees that are intended for mainline" were in -mm.

It *has* been in -mm, except for periods when akpm has dropped it due
to conflicts due to the "must have an in-tree user" doctrinaire
attitude due to a conflict with the r/o bind patch.

Did you actually try to do a compile test, or only made sure the patch
would apply?  The patch won't collide at application time, but it
would when you compile it....

						- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ