linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2 -mm] fault-injection: safer defaults, trivial optimization, cleanup

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:	Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:37:54 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Don Mullis <dwm@...r.net>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Akinobu Mita <mita@...aclelinux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 -mm] fault-injection: safer defaults, trivial
 optimization, cleanup

On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 23:44:26 -0800
Don Mullis <dwm@...r.net> wrote:

> Set /debug/fail*/* defaults supposed most likely to please a new user.
> Clamp /debug/fail*/stacktrace-depth to MAX_STACK_TRACE_DEPTH.
> 
> In should_fail(), move stack-unwinding test past cheaper tests (performance
> gain not quantified).  Simplify logic; eliminate goto.
> Use bool/true/false consistently.
> 
> Correct and disambiguate documentation.

We'd prefer one-patch-per-concept, please. This all sounds like about
six patches.

We _could_ merge this patch as-is, but it means that when this stuff
finally hits mainline it would go in as a nice sequence of logical patches,
followed by a random thing which is splattered all over all the preceding
patches.
-
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/