linux-kernel - Re: [stable] [patch 21/50] brd: dont show ramdisks in /proc/partitions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <484D9263.2040401@zytor.com>
Date:	Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:28:19 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
CC:	Marcin Krol <hawk@...-linux.org>, jejb@...nel.org,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
	Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>, stable@...nel.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [stable] [patch 21/50] brd: dont show ramdisks in	/proc/partitions

Chris Wright wrote:
> * H. Peter Anvin (hpa@...nel.org) wrote:
>> This seems a bit like cargo cult programming to me.  If there isn't a 
>> known, good, reason to revert this behaviour change, I would consider it 
>> a bugfix, not a regression.
> 
> We have one /proc/partitions parser that got broken (never saw details
> on how).  I don't care for this change either (esp. since nbd is still
> left out...it's inconsistent).
> 
> This is now the upstream behaviour (obvious since it's a -stable
> candidate), and the change was introduced in 2.6.25...I'd actually prefer
> to drop this patch, but there's no good reason to deviate if upstream
> keeps this one.  I can defer while upstream gets revisited, can you
> revisit this upstream?

I had to ask Chris offline what he meant with this... basically, he and 
I both agree that absent hard evidence of malfunction, we should revert 
to 2.6.25 behaviour.

	-hpa

--
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/