linux-kernel - Re: Merging of completely unreviewed drivers

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: <20080222184036.GA6060@ucw.cz>
Date:	Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:40:37 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Glenn Streiff <gstreiff@...Effect.com>,
	Faisal Latif <flatif@...Effect.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: Merging of completely unreviewed drivers

On Thu 2008-02-21 14:08:55, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:01:24 +0200
> Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > [ Linus Added to the To: since I want to hear his opinion on this
> > issue. ]
> > 
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:28:55PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> > >  > This driver should really have gotten some review before being
> > >  > included in the kernel.
> > > 
> > >  > Even a simple checkpatch run finds more than > 250 stylistic
> > >  > errors (not code bugs but cases where the driver violates the
> > >  > standard code formatting rules of kernel code).
> > > 
> > > Linus has strongly stated that we should merge hardware drivers
> > > early, and I agree: although the nes driver clearly needs more
> > > work, there's no advantage to users with the hardware in forcing
> > > them to wait for 2.6.26 to merge the driver, since they'll just
> > > have to patch the grungy code in themselves anyway.  And by merging
> > > the driver early, we get fixed up for any tree-wide changes and
> > > allow janitors to help with the cleanup.
> > 
> > Is it really intended to merge drivers without _any_ kind of review?
> 
> No of course not.
> 
> I totally agree we should be more agressive in merging drivers earlier.
> A minimal review needs to happen so for a few things imo
> 1) That the driver doesn't break the build
> 2) That the driver has no obvious huge security holes
>    (this is a big deal for unsuspecting users)
> 3) that there's not an obscene amount of "uses deprecated api" compiler warnings
>    (since those are annoying for everyone else)
> 4) that people who don't have the hardware are not negatively affected
>    (say crashes without the hw or so)

5) does not introduce new and ugly user-kernel we'll have problems
fixing/removing?
							Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/