linux-kernel - Re: [Regression] Please revert a91a2785b20

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.LFD.2.00.1103290049330.2774@localhost6.localdomain6>
Date:	Tue, 29 Mar 2011 01:03:17 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mike Snitzer <snizer@...hat.com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [Regression] Please revert a91a2785b20

On Mon, 28 Mar 2011, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:
> 
> Thomas,
> 
> Thomas> But the changelog does not give the courtesy of explaining these
> Thomas> changes. Also there is no fcking reason why the kernel cannot
> Thomas> deal with the missing integrity capabilities of a drive just by
> Thomas> emitting a warning msg and dealing gracefully with the outcome.
> 
> My mistake. I was made aware of it earlier today and I'm working on a

Why didn't you send a revert to Linus right away?

Darn. I sent a pull request earlier today, which I immediately
revoked, when I noticed that it had a late reported testing
failure. It did not hit Linus public tree fortunately. I could have
said "I'm working on a fix" as well. But that's the wrong thing to do.

So for your thing, it was already in Linus tree. Though if you get
aware of it and it's revertable w/o creating lots of mess, then it's
the right thing to revert it immediately. Do not drag out regressions
longer than necessary, please.

> Surprised we didn't see any reports of this in -next. It's been
> in there for a while.

next does unfortunately get not the full exposure and it's neither a
replacement for common sense nor an excuse for not testing the common
case (i.e. non enterprise hardware with default distro configs)

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/