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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1001061623130.24920@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:25:59 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 6/6] x86: cpumask_of_node() should handle -1 as a node

On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Anton Blanchard wrote:

> I wasn't using the example to strengthen the case of the -1 behaviour, but to
> highlight that a complete fix would be more work and risk not making it back
> to -stable.
> 

I don't think that we should defer a complete fix to the callers because 
it's "more work."  If you've identified places where -1 is passed to 
cpumask_of_node() without being checked, I think those would be fairly 
obvious -stable candidates themselves instead of this series.
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ