linux-kernel - Re: Fix x86 32 bit FRAME

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080114103305.GA27977@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:33:05 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Fix x86 32 bit FRAME_POINTER chasing code


* Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com> wrote:

> > it's a 2.6.24.1 candidate i believe. We trigger plenty of various 
> > crashes during x86.git maintenance and others hit various crashes in 
> > -mm, so by the time .1 is released we'll have it in .25 and can 
> > backport it. Most folks/distros will update to 2.6.24.1 very quickly 
> > so there's no risk of months loss of quality to kerneloops.org data 
> > either.
> 
> Using the same logic, why not put it in 2.6.24 and then remove it in 
> 2.6.24.1 if it's broken?

hm, did you understood my .25 reference to mean 2.6.25-final? I meant 
2.6.25-rc1. Or if there's a 2.6.24-rc8 planned then we could put it in 
right now [with the bisectability fixes, i.e. not the original series]. 
I.e. IMO what we shouldnt do is to put in these fixes without having had 
_some_ -rc release inbetween.

	Ingo
--
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/