linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] fsstack: Fix up ecryptfs's fsstack usage

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20061205144913.fea98946.akpm@osdl.org>
Date:	Tue, 5 Dec 2006 14:49:13 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fsstack: Fix up ecryptfs's fsstack usage

On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 17:38:07 -0500
Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu> wrote:

> > When your patches are queued in -mm please do test them there, and review
> > others' changes to them, and raise patches against them.  Raising patches
> > against one's private tree and not testing the code which is planned to be
> > merged can introduce errors.
> 
> Sorry about that. I noticed your fix, and the one by Adrian. And I did add
> them to my fsstack queue.

you don't have an fsstack queue any more ;)

Please, I really do want developers to test their code in -mm once I've
merged it.  What happens if there's some nasty interaction between your
patch and someone else's?  We'll not find out about it and it'll get
merged.
-
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/