| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:59:43 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> To: "Ramirez Luna, Omar" <omar.ramirez@...com> Cc: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>, lk <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lak <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: BUG() dies silently On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 03:43:13PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 09:26:49AM -0500, Ramirez Luna, Omar wrote: > > Hi > > > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in> wrote: > > > If the "Use generic BUG() handler" patch is only scheduled for the next > > > merge window and not for 3.1, can this patch be merged instead for 3.1 > > > and -stable? This problem is easily seen with GCC 4.6. > > > > I can send it for both and let the maintainers decide. > > > > Russell, do you give your ack? > > I think it's too large a change for -stable and 3.1 - let's get it into > 3.2 first, and make sure no one sees any regressions there. Then we can > think about submitting it to stable once its proven itself. And we're seeing link failures with the patch in the kernel, so it's *definitely* not stable material as it stands, even if the current code is a problem for GCC 4.6. Regressions trump bug fixes. -- 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