linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] Make SCSI SG v4 driver enabled by default and remove EXPERIMENTAL dependency, since udev depends on BSG.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:06:06 -0400
From:	"John Stoffel" <john@...ffel.org>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
	John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Make SCSI SG v4 driver enabled by default and
 remove EXPERIMENTAL dependency, since udev depends on BSG.

>>>>> "James" == James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> writes:

James> On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 09:38 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> On 07/13/2009 10:43 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>> >>>>>> "John" == John Stoffel <john@...ffel.org> writes:
>> > 
>> > Dammit, I messed up here sending this patch.  I've just edited the
>> > subject line and re-sent it with a bit more description.  I think this
>> > patch is perfectly good to go into 2.6.31 right now, esp since it's
>> > not changing code, just whether the code is turned on by default from
>> > now on.
>> > 
>> 
>> I would like it if you'd also CC stable@...nel.org on this patch. As this
>> condition is already true for distros in the field.

James> The stable tree is for bug *fixes*.  Moving an option out from
James> under experimental is basically an enhancement, even if it
James> could be argued it should have been done long ago.

I'm not so sure I agree with this, since this feature is used by UDEV
and has been enabled by default on a bunch of distros for ages (as I'm
told, personally I haven't confirmed this).

But if you object to stable back porting, what are you feelings on
this change for 2.6.31-rc* now?  Do you think it needs to be held off
and that it's too late to make this change?

Thanks,
John


--
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/