linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] x86 updates

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: <20080210230927.GA24812@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:09:27 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [git pull] x86 updates

* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > 
> > So Thomas, don't do this. I don't like it. The same way I didn't like 
> > seeing Ingo trying to mix in a kgdb pull into his x86 pull. Keep these 
> > things separate - git is *really* good at having multiple branches with 
> > different lines of development, use it that way (or send odd-ball misc 
> > patches just as emails).
> 
> Please accept my apologies.
> 
> I went through the content, pointed out the other two non x86 patches 
> and did not notice the vsprintf one. My bad.

and i'd like to apologize for the misleading Subject line which said 
"Subject: x86: ...". That i think made us miss the generic impact later 
on (we remind ourselves about non-arch/x86 patches via Subject line 
annotations and via looking at the diffstat before pull requests), and 
the accidentally missing diffstat just removed the last-line defense 
against such annotation mistakes.

btw., i was -->.<--- this close to removing this patch from x86.git 
altogether - because it had a bug (which already shows its 
non-obviousness) and i didnt think this complication was worth it. When 
that happened i took a really hard look at its correctness and 
worthiness and narrowly decided to keep it - but enforced an unusually 
long testing interval for this patch.

	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/