linux-kernel - Re: [stable] [PATCH] initramfs: Allow rootfs to use tmpfs instead of ramfs

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: <200607312358.41199.a1426z@gawab.com>
Date:	Mon, 31 Jul 2006 23:58:41 +0300
From:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
To:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...l.org, stable@...nel.org, akpm@...l.org,
	chrisw@...s-sol.org, grim@...ead.cc
Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH] initramfs: Allow rootfs to use tmpfs instead of ramfs

Chris Wright wrote:
> * Al Boldi (a1426z@...ab.com) wrote:
> > Being semantically the same, while not exhibiting ramfs pitfalls, makes
> > it suitable to be pushed into the -stable tree, IMHO.
>
> You are failing to show how this is a critical type bugfix for -stable.
> We are picky about -stable additions because we don't want to undermine
> the value of the -stable tree.

If you mean critical as in "the kernel panics on boot without this patch", 
then yes, this patch is not critical.

But if you think it's important to allow -stable to make full use of rootfs, 
then this patch offers a much needed fix, by simply replugging existing 
code.

Again, it's your call.


Thanks!

--
Al

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/