linux-kernel - Re: PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_FILTER has different values based on bitness

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: <20141009065402.GA20178@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 9 Oct 2014 08:54:02 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_FILTER has different values based on bitness


* David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote:

> On 10/8/14, 9:22 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >I wonder how that works best, being on the receiving side of such requests
> >from time to time.
> >
> >I guess that to scale, that would be better done by:
> >
> >1. Reporter tests if the patch applies (and works) on the desired
> >targets.
> >
> >2. Reporter sends the request, with the above test results, to
> >stable@...nel.org, following whatever conventions are to get the
> >attention of the stable release maintainers.
> 
> My understanding is that subsystem maintainers do the stable 
> requests.

At least for perf bits, the usual workflow is that pretty much 
anyone can make requests for backports that we maintainers 
missed, and subsystem maintainers look over them and object if 
they don't like the suggestion. (Obviously you need to Cc: 
maintainers.)

In other words, feel free to forward (tested!) backport commit 
IDs to -stable, with maintainers Cc:-ed, and feel free to provide 
conflict resolution as well, in cases where they don't apply 
cleanly.

> A patch adjustment is needed for v3.4 and v3.10. I am willing 
> to do the necessary patch mods for 3.4, 3.10, and 3.14.

That would be useful.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/