linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/38] Remove struct mm_struct::exe

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: <20090526162415.fb9cefef.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 26 May 2009 16:24:15 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>
Cc:	adobriyan@...il.com, xemul@...allels.com,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/38] Remove struct mm_struct::exe_file et al

On Tue, 26 May 2009 04:36:18 -0700
Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com> wrote:

> I don't see any mention in the changelog of the point brought up by Ingo:
> 
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/10/105

Nor of Eric's comments.

Alexey, pleeeze don't do this.  We (read: I) heavily depend upon patch
submitters to keep track of outstanding issues and review comments,
etc.

If the patch submitter simply blows these things off then it devolves
to me having to keep track of each patch's issue list as well as the
patch itself.  My workload goes up by a factor of N and the error rate
goes up by N^2 :(

--
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/