linux-kernel - Re: [GIT] Security subsystem changes for 3.1

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:	Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:42:13 +1000 (EST)
From:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT] Security subsystem changes for 3.1

On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 7:13 PM, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org> wrote:
> > Please pull.
> >
> > Highlights for this window are a major upgrade to Tomoyo and a whole bunch
> > of TPM fixes.  Fairly quiet otherwise.
> 
> Argh. Please don't pre-resolve conflicts outside of your subsystem.
> 
> I *want* to see conflicts. I want to see who is stepping on whose
> toes, and where problems occur.

Ok, but this conflict was in my subsystem.

> 
> If you know it's some complicated conflict (this one really wasn't), I
> do appreciate if it people do a "I have a pre-resolved branch in xyz,
> so you can verify the end result from there, or just take it if you
> are lazy", but even that isn't really required. If it really ends up
> being too complicated for me, and no such branch exists, I'll let you
> know. It happens, although it's pretty rare.
> 
> So I took the unresolved branch instead of your merge,
> 
>                               Linus
> 

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>