| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20080601014824.528173bb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 01:48:24 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: m68k libc5 regression On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 10:37:59 +0200 (CEST) Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote: > > I shall merge this fix into my tree (y'know - the one where memory > > management patches are hosted) and I'll get it into 2.6.26 and shall > > offer it to the -stable team. This will cause me to get collisions > > with the duplicated patch in linux-next but fortunately it is small. > > This time. > > So what's the appropriate way to handle this? Well at least please reply letting people know what's happening with it. Ask me to merge it and remind me that it's needed in -stable. Or just send the thing to Linus and -stable immediately. Copy me and I'll do the usual merge-it-in-case-linus-misses-it trick. > I should have kept it in the m68k series after NEXT_PATCHES_END, so > nobody sees it exists? That would work, as long as we know that the patch is firmly on the mainline and -stable paths. -- 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