linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11]: Hibernation: fix the number of pages used for hibernate/thaw buffering

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]

Message-Id: <201204270011.20430.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Fri, 27 Apr 2012 00:11:20 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Bojan Smojver <bojan@...ursive.com>
Cc:	Per Olofsson <pelle@...ian.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11]: Hibernation: fix the number of pages used for hibernate/thaw buffering

On Thursday, April 26, 2012, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 22:00 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > No, I didn't requested that.  There's nothing like stable-only patches,
> > we only backport mainline commits to -stable.
> 
> Yeah, you told me that my patch was not straightforward, so I broke off
> part of it for -stable that would fix just the most critical problem.

Which is entirely OK, but see below.

> > > This patch should go to linux-next:
> > > 
> > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=133426808115262&w=2
> > 
> > OK
> > 
> > So I'll include it into my v3.5 push and I don't want to hear about how
> > urgent it is any more.  Is that clear enough?
> 
> Look, I created a problem on some people's computer in 3.2. I feel
> responsible for fixing it. I do not want their computers to hang because
> of something I wrote, especially if there is a fix.
> 
> So, if I will say one more time. This patch is a fix for a regression,
> caused by me, since 3.2. Please ask -stable maintainers to include it in
> version in 3.2 and above.

The -stable rules are such that it only is permitted to put a commit into
-stable if the analogous commit is already in the mainline.  That also
covers reverts and such.

> If you want me to create a set of patches instead and then you backport
> just one, let me know. I will do whatever is necessary to fix this
> regression.

Can you just create a second patch on top of what's in linux-next now?

Rafael
--
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/