linux-kernel - Re: Please merge two small bug fix patches from linux-next

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 8 Jan 2012 15:14:01 -0800
From:	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
To:	Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Please merge two small bug fix patches from linux-next

On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2012-01-08 at 13:26 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> wrote:
>> > > Below are two patches that have been in linux-next for ages (via akpm's
>> > > tree). They are prette simple, straight-up, bug fixes. They have been
>> > > submitted to maintainers multiple times over (IIRC at least the past
>> > > year), but for some reason the maintainers seem uninterested in picking
>> > > them up (or even responding to them).
>> []
>> > they seem to have Andrew's sign-off, so I'd have expected them to
>> > come through Andew. What's up?
>>
>> >From my perspective, the issue lies with James'
>> apparent desire to keep scsi tree changes as close
>> to zero as possible.
>>
>> Many obvious corrections to scsi defects have gone
>> unapplied.
>>
>
> I have to agree. It's actually gotten to the point that I personally
> completely avoid/ignore scsi code when looking for stuff to fix/improve
> since I don't expect to be able to get the patches merged anyway..
>

Basically the same experience here trying to submit sparse annotations
or patched using the get_unaligned_*
functions instead of explicit byte-shifting.

Harvey
--
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/