linux-kernel - Re: Multiple free during oprofile unload

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:	Fri, 25 May 2007 19:37:37 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Multiple free during oprofile unload

On Fri, 25 May 2007 20:02:58 +0200
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> wrote:

> 
> > If the functionality is completely busted in -stable,
> 
> It's not; e.g. it works great on my P4 testbox with 2.6.21
> 
> > adding a patch that's 
> > isolated to that component can't really make things much worse.
> > All we've done here is move the breakage.
> 
> I don't think stable is the right place for development.

I'd agree entirely with Dave - if you are applying a fix to something
that is currently totally broken which may make it work and which doesn't
affect any other bit of code then it goes into the stable tree.

Absolutes like "no xyz in the stable tree" don't work in the real world
with real users. Intelligence does.
-
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/