linux-kernel - Re: Next patches for the 2.6.25 queue

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: <20071213133202.11374f54.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:32:02 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: Next patches for the 2.6.25 queue

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 09:46:42 -0500
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
> I would like to post my next patches in a way that would make it as
> easy for you and the community to review them. Currently, the patches
> that have really settled down are :
> 
> * For 2.6.25
> 
> - Text Edit Lock
>   - Looks-good-to Ingo Molnar.
> - Immediate Values
>   - Redux version, asked by Rusty
> 
> * For 2.6.25 ?
> 
> Another patchset that is technically ok (however Rusty dislikes the
> complexity inherent to the algorithms required to be reentrant wrt NMI
> and MCE, although it's been reviewed by the community for months). I
> have also replyed to Ingo's concerns about effeciency of my approach
> compared to dtrace by providing numbers, but he has not replyed yet.
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg238317.html
> 
> - Markers use Immediate Values
> 
> * Maybe for 2.6.26 ...
> 
> Once we have this, and the instrumentation (submitted as RFC in the past
> weeks), in the kernel, the only architecture dependent element that will
> be left is the LTTng timestamping code.
> 
> And then, from that point, the following patchset is mostly
> self-contained and stops modifying code all over the kernel tree. It
> is the LTTng tracer.
> 
> Trying to improve my approach : I guess that submitting at most 15
> patches at a time (each 1-2 days), against the -mmotm tree, would be the
> way to do it ?
> 

Just for some context, I have...

- 1,400-odd open bugzilla reports

- 719 emails saved away in my emailed-bug-reports folder, all of which
  need to be gone through, asking originators to retest and
  re-report-if-unfixed.

- A big ugly email titled "2.6.24-rc5-git1: Reported regressions from
  2.6.23" in my inbox.

All of which makes it a bit inappropriate to be thinking about
intrusive-looking new features.

Ho hum.  Just send me the whole lot against rc5-mm1 and I'll stick it in
there and we'll see what breaks.

--
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/