linux-kernel - Re: Not really merged? Re: [merged] x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy

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:	Fri, 28 Oct 2011 10:33:36 -0400
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, hpa@...or.com,
	jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	stable@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: Not really merged? Re: [merged]
 x86-paravirt-pte-updates-in-kunmap_atomic-need-to-be-synchronous-regardless-of-lazy_mmu-mode.patch
 removed from -mm tree

> > But IMO it's at least as important to figure out what went wrong. I 
> > somehow doubt it that you spuriously dropped it - that someone else 
> > messes up has a far higher likelihood.
> 
> My drop was legitimate. 
> 
> Here's the commit from the Oct 14 linux-next:
> 
> 
> commit ab67482036cee590753dd42b7f66aada97e6dcde
> Author:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
> AuthorDate: Fri Sep 23 17:02:29 2011 -0400
> Commit:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
> CommitDate: Mon Sep 26 09:12:37 2011 -0400
.. snip..
> 
> I'm not sure what to make of that.  The signoffs imply that Konrad is
> running his own git tree, but I don't think he is.  Or someone (Jeremy
> or Rusty I think) merged it but didn't add a signoff.

Hey Andrew,

I am running my own tree (git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git)

> Note that the patch was merged using its old name "x86/paravirt:
> Partially revert "remove lazy mode in interrupts"".  The patch got
> renamed to "x86/paravirt: PTE updates in k(un)map_atomic need to be
> synchronous, regardless of lazy_mmu mode" and perhaps this prompted
> someone to drop the old-named patch then lose the new-named one.

I am at loss as why I had that patch in my tree. I *might* have merged
in my #linux-next to compile/build/run-time test and then pushed that
tree. But I can't recall exactly why I would have done that (the push).

The fault is with me and I am sorry for making you (and Ingo) spend the
whole night digging through linux-next git history to figure this out.
--
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/