linux-ext4 - Re: [2.6 patch] fs/jbd/journal.c: cleanups

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]

Message-ID: <20080218132858.GA12568@mit.edu>
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