linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] trace_skb: fix build when CONFIG

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: <20090817.170337.139340805.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:03:37 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mingo@...e.hu
Cc:	randy.dunlap@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	nhorman@...driver.com, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] trace_skb: fix build when CONFIG_NET is not
 enabled

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:06:54 +0200

> ... but these are the wrong patches, they should be removed or 
> reverted and redone properly.

Given the number of users of net-next-2.6, removal via rebasing is
simply not an option.  The other two posibilities, sure...

> It's not just about keeping kernel/trace/* changes in the tracing 
> tree (which we can relax on-demand given agreement), it's that 
> these patches are also _wrong_ and we cannot relax anything about 
> that.

Why don't we give Neil a chance to review the situation and fix things
up?

If revert is the final decision, that's fine, I'll revert everything.

But in the mean time at least give Neil a chance to read all of your
feedback and coordinate a way to fix things with everyone.
--
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/