linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86: oops on uaccess faults outside of user addresses

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20130528.015105.1513437101791265718.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 28 May 2013 01:51:05 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mingo@...nel.org
Cc:	luto@...capital.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	trinity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86: oops on uaccess faults outside of user
 addresses

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 10:25:14 +0200

> 
> * David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> 
>> Please don't mix networking and non-networking changes into a patch
>> series.
> 
> As explained in 0/5 the networking fix justifies the first 4 patches. The 
> networking fix is independent of the first 4 patches.
> 
>> Submit the networking patch to netdev@...r.kernel.org
> 
> He Cc:-ed the patch to netdev@...r.kernel.org. If you agree with it then 
> the fix should probably be picked up ASAP.

He submitted it as part of a series which implies that it belongs together
with the others.

If it does not, he should submit it seperately.

If they belong together, then the entire series should be CC:'d to netdev
so that networking developers can see all of the context and participate
in the patches that the networking "enables".
--
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/