linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] percpu fixes for 2.6.32-rc6

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: <4AFA35CB.5030801@kernel.org>
Date:	Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:55:55 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] percpu fixes for 2.6.32-rc6

Hello,

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I want the cleanup because I think that the code sucks from a "future 
> proofing" and readability standpoint, but I really don't mind one way or 
> the other whether you want to finally do that one "return 1" correctly for 
> one commit, only to then fix it to not do that three-way test of a single 
> function in the next one.
> 
> So whatever works - as long as the end result both looks sane and doesn't 
> have the bug we clearly have now.

I was mostly worrying about introducing unrelated bug while changing.
Anyways, one patch it is.  I'll route it through tip as suggested by
Ingo in a few hours.

Thanks a lot.

-- 
tejun
--
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/