| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 15:45:42 +0200 From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, sandeen@...deen.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Execute stack overflow warning on interrupt stack II Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi Andi, > > On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote: >> > Err, it checks the process stack when 4KSTACKS=n >> >> Ok then please add the two changes if you feel strongly about that >> (to the latest version I sent). >> >> You always edit my patches anyways (usually driving me crazy when I have >> dependent patches because nothing applies anymore when all the variables >> got renamed like you often do) so I don't see any reason why you can't >> do that here. > > Heh, do you mean to say that all this time I should have just asked > Andrew to fix all the patches I've submitted rather take the trouble > to do that myself after the review? ;-) It is quite ok for trivial changes (like adding KERN_WARN or unlikely). And yes Andrew does this all the time too. It makes sense because for such trivialities it is less work to just change the patch than to comment. -Andi -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists