linux-kernel - Re: [regression] 3.0-rc boot failure -- bisected to cd4ea6ae3982

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]

Date:	Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:04:00 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>, mahesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [regression] 3.0-rc boot failure -- bisected to cd4ea6ae3982

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>
> Right, so we can either merge my scary patches now and have 3.0 boot on
> 16+ node machines (and risk breaking something), or delay them until
> 3.0.1 and have 16+ node machines suffer a little.

So how much impact does your scary patch have on machines that don't
have multiple nodes? If it's a "the code isn't even called by normal
machines" kind of setup, I don't think I care a lot.

                  Linus
--
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/