linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86,nmi: Section header fixes

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]

Message-ID: <20120618133305.GU32472@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jun 2012 09:33:05 -0400
From:	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	baryluk@....if.uj.edu.pl, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	JBeulich@...e.com, zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86,nmi: Section header fixes

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:07:31AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > An earlier attempt at a fix for the problem described in the second patch was
> > committed to Ingo's tree.  Later a smaller/cleaner patch was posted.  This
> > series just reverts the original patch and then applies the second patch.
> > 
> > The second patch looks a lot cleaner this way instead of just provding the
> > delta patch on top.
> > 
> > Ingo, let me know if this is not what you want.
> 
> Wouldnt this be nicer as a delta enhancement, instead of a 
> revert+fix-done-differently?
> 
> That way we'd should that the original one was good as well, 
> it's just that this one is easier to maintain.

Ok.  I originally had a delta diff, but it looked ugly and hard to
understand the new changes.  That is why I did it this way.  I'll send the
delta enhancement and let you decide.

Cheers,
Don
--
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/