linux-kernel - Re: [v2.6.26] what's brewing in x86.git for v2.6.26

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: <20080417014054.ea788f1f.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 17 Apr 2008 01:40:54 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [v2.6.26] what's brewing in x86.git for v2.6.26

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:30:00 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:23:38 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> > How much of this has not been in linux-next?
> 
> none.

That's a relief.  Please keep it this way - I plan on basing -mm on
linux-next after 2.6.26-rc1 and that should prevent reoccurrences.

> but we do much more testing than just getting code into other trees. We 
> cross-build 96 different configurations on other non-x86 architectures:
> 
>   http://www.tglx.de/autoqa-cgi/index?run=81&tree=1
> 
> last night's run was: 96 out of 96 configs built successfully.
> 
> This covers: alpha, arm, mips, powerpc, sparc64, x86, m32r, powerpc, 
> xtensa, mips, sh, sparc, parisc, powerpc. We test the various branches 
> (amongst them for-akpm) and combination trees as well.
> 
> and the backbone of arch/x86 QA we do are the build, boot and stress 
> tests we do on x86: we ran and booted thousands of x86 randconfigs in 
> the past few days alone. x86/latest boots and works from the smallest 
> boxes up to a 64-way testbox. On the 64-way box i did a 1 week burn-in 
> stress-test last week as well, for any longer-term effects.

That's nowhere as useful as it could be.

By keeping all this code out of -mm you haven't solved any of the
merge/integration problems which we had in 2.6.24-rcX.  They're all still
there.  All you did was to push them out of the two-month
integrate-and-test period and put them into the 2.6.25 merge window
instead.

> > >  - ftrace plugin for sysprof
> > 
> > sysprof is crap.
> 
> you mean the original hack? Sure, that had a number of problems and we 
> are not offering that for a merge.

whew.

> But have you seen the latest code we are offering for merge?

No.  Was it ever sent out for review?

> Check out 
> sched-devel/latest and kernel/trace/trace_sysprof.c. Nicely generalized 
> on top of stacktrace.h, put into the ftrace framework, userspace has 
> been ported to that too. No more special sysprof-only API hack.

Would prefer to not have to go fishing in git trees to find code to review.


--
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/