linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/17] 2.6.27-stable review

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: <20081023050625.GA9932@1wt.eu>
Date:	Thu, 23 Oct 2008 07:06:25 +0200
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable@...nel.org, Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
	Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>,
	Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
	Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>,
	Rodrigo Rubira Branco <rbranco@...checkpoint.com>,
	Jake Edge <jake@....net>, Eugene Teo <eteo@...hat.com>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [patch 00/17] 2.6.27-stable review

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 09:01:26PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 11:33:34AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.27.3 release.
> >There are 17 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> >to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> >let us know.  If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and
> >wants to add a Signed-off-by: line to the patch, please respond with it.
> >
> >These patches are sent out with a number of different people on the
> >Cc: line.  If you wish to be a reviewer, please email stable@...nel.org
> >to add your name to the list.  If you want to be off the reviewer list,
> >also email us.
> >
> >Responses should be made by Wed, October 22, 2008 19:00:00 UTC.
> >Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 
> OK, I realize I'm late.  Apologies in advance for that.
> 
> I don't see how patches 3, 16, and 17 really fit into the "stable"
> rules.  None of them:
> 
> "... fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
>  marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
>  security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short,
>  something critical."
> 
> So, are we being a bit more lax on the requirements for the
> -stable kernels and I missed the memo, or?

3 definitely is "oh that's not good", and 16&17 are just support
for a few new IDs. It's not the first time this happens, and as
long as there are not too many or they don't change the driver's
code, I don't see the problem. It increases the ability for people
to test the kernel and report bugs too BTW.

I think it's better to have strict rules and be lax sometimes
than having no rules at all or being too strict and annoy users.

Willy

--
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/