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, 14 Jun 2012 19:48:23 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: Fix the outmost stupidity of tracing_off()

On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 01:12 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> That's still not an excuse for utter stupidity, really. Just check the
> commit date vs. your discovery time.
> 
> I told you often enough to be more careful, but that one is really
> beyond comprehension.

I'm really thinking that this was due to a bad push. As I believe I had
stale code (made this fix locally, but pushed the broken branch) and all
my changes were on top of it. When updating to the latest tip, I had
code I didn't want to merge, or conflicts happened, that I ended up
cherry-picking changes. Which breaks from my normal workflow, which is
to make sure my old changes fast forward to tip before doing a rebase of
my new code.

I have several branches that I work on and when they are ready, I rebase
them on top of tip, run a bunch of tests, and then push them out.

I'm a heavy user of tracing_off() too, and since the development of my
work is usually on older branches, I would not have noticed the bug. As
after I get things working I usually rebase on top of tip before doing
my final tests and asking for the pull request.

I'm usually very careful about checking that things fast forward and
such, and that rebases don't have strange conflicts. This one slipped
by, and yes, I'm extremely ashamed and embarrassed by it. That's why I
said in my pull request 'This was one of those "oh crap" moments'.

-- Steve


--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ