| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20071113234033.GL1356@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:40:33 +0000 From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk> To: Mark Lord <liml@....ca> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, protasnb@...il.com, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org, linux-input@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Subject: Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 03:18:07PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote: > Russell King wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:08:32AM -0500, Mark Lord wrote: > >> Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> .. > >>> This is all QA-101 that _cannot be argued against on a rational basis_, > >>> it's just that these sorts of things have been largely ignored for > >>> years, in favor of the all-too-easy "open source means many eyeballs and > >>> that is our QA" answer, which is a _good_ answer but by far not the most > >>> intelligent answer! Today "many eyeballs" is simply not good enough and > >>> nature (and other OS projects) will route us around if we dont change. > >> .. > >> > >> QA-101 and "many eyeballs" are not at all in opposition. > >> The latter is how we find out about bugs on uncommon hardware, > >> and the former is what we need to track them and overall quality. > >> > >> A HUGE problem I have with current "efforts", is that once someone > >> reports a bug, the onus seems to be 99% on the *reporter* to find > >> the exact line of code or commit. Ghad what a repressive method. > > > > 99% on the reporter? Is that why I always try to understand the > > reporters problem (*provided* it's in an area I know about) and come > > up with a patch to test a theory or fix the issue? > .. > > Same here. > > I just find it weird that something can be known broken for several -rc* > kernels before I happen to install it, discover it's broken on my own machine, > and then I track it down, fix it, and submit the patch, generally all within a > couple of hours. Where the heck was the dude(ess) that broke it ?? AWOL. Same thing can be said for compile breakages as well. Looking at the latest kautobuild output: ARM ep93xx defconfig has been broken since 2.6.23-git1 due to: drivers/net/arm/ep93xx_eth.c:420: error: implicit declaration of function '__netif_rx_schedule_prep' caused by: [NET]: Make NAPI polling independent of struct net_device objects. ARM netx defconfig has been broken since 2.6.23-git1 due to: drivers/net/netx-eth.c: In function 'netx_eth_hard_start_xmit': drivers/net/netx-eth.c:131: error: 'dev' undeclared (first use in this function) drivers/net/netx-eth.c:131: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once drivers/net/netx-eth.c:131: error: for each function it appears in.) drivers/net/netx-eth.c: In function 'netx_eth_receive': drivers/net/netx-eth.c:158: error: 'dev' undeclared (first use in this function) caused by: [NET] drivers/net: statistics cleanup #1 -- save memory and shrink code Haven't got a report for either of those, but Kautobuild lets people know if folk can be bothered to subscribe to its mailing list and/or look at the site occasionally. I suspect the maintainers of the above drivers aren't aware that their drivers are broken. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists