linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] freezer: add unsafe versions of freezable helpers

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: <CA+55aFwbXk_r-4p37YiMTQj2HNRA94xohr6DADuQXpHsKSA7NQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 6 May 2013 14:58:31 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
Cc:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	linux-nfs <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Ben Chan <benchan@...omium.org>,
	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] freezer: add unsafe versions of freezable helpers

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com> wrote:
>>
>> There are many other possibilities for other codepaths that end up in
>> wait_for_response(). Once we get a solution in place for NFS, we'll
>> need to do something very similar for CIFS.
>
> Makes sense, I will add CIFS to the patch.  Would you prefer it in the
> same or separate patches.

Quite frankly, is it worth resurrecting these patches at all?

The only things it actually complained about are not worth the pain
fixing and are getting explicitly not warned about - is there any
reason to believe the patches are worth maintaining and the extra
complexity is worth it?

           Linus
--
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/