linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86_64 ia32 syscall restart fix

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]

Date:	Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:37:05 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 ia32 syscall restart fix


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> and one area where commit messages are totally important IMO is bug 
> forensics. For every regression we find we try to put in the commit ID 
> that broke it. Information like that is vital to have a good (and 
> objective) picture about how bugs get into and get out of the kernel 
> and it also alerts us to change/improve infrastructure if certain 
> categories of bugs happen too often.

another "commit space" feature Thomas and me was thinking about was to 
put in "backport suggestions" for -stable the following way:

   Backport-suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>

and the -stable tree could then notice it, and once it has been 
backported, they could put in their "done" notifiers via:

   Backported-from: 67ca7bde2e9d3516b5

or:

   Backport-rejected: 67ca7bde2e9d3516b5

This way the act of suggesting backports to the -stable tree (and their 
rejection) could be fully automated, and the answer to the rather 
difficult question:

   "has -stable picked up all backport requests, and if not, why?"

could be scripted up.

A further (small) variation of this scheme: if a fix is noticed to be a 
backport candidate later on, or a user notices that a fix that has gone 
upstream fixes a -stable bug too, this information could be signalled in 
a separate, special, empty commit:

   Backport-suggested-by: 67ca7bde2e9d35, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>


this way subsystem maintainers could have a reliable protocol of getting 
fixes integrated into -stable - purely via the commit messages in your 
tree.

... but then we decided that handling x86 architecture maintainance is 
work enough already, without us complicating our own life any further 
;-)

But the idea is solid nevertheless, and if everyone did it the -stable 
guys would have a much easier life as well :-) [ We could start doing it 
in x86.git if there's general agreement and if the -stable guys 
specifically asked for this. ]

	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/