linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] dell-wmi: Don't send unneeded keypresses

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: <833BBFBF-227B-43AE-9976-FEDB55226249@infradead.org>
Date:	Sat, 20 Dec 2014 08:58:32 -0800
From:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
To:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
CC:	Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
	Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@...il.com>,
	mjg59@...f.ucam.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] dell-wmi: Don't send unneeded keypresses



On December 20, 2014 8:28:04 AM PST, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br> wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Dec 2014, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> > > > Ok, I agree that it is subjective how serious it is...
>> > > > Just to remind that patch fixing problem described in
>> > > > 
>> > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/platform-driver-x86/msg05922.ht
>> > > > ml
>> > > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/platform-driver-x86/msg05924.h
>> > > > tml
>> > > 
>> > > I don't have any objection to sending this back to stable.
>> > > Stable is for fixing REAL bugs, as opposed to theorhetical
>> > > races, etc. This is a "real" bug.
>> > > 
>> > > As to not chaning behavior, if it's OK for mainline, it's OK
>> > > for stable. At least that is my understanding of it. Folks
>> > > are free to verify with Greg if they disagree.
>> > 
>> > Darren, so how you decided? Now when patches are in linus tree, 
>> > are you going to send them to stable tree?
>> 
>> Please don't. -stable is for serious mainline bugs people are
>actually
>> hitting. Null pointer dereference counts, if people actually hit
>> it. This is more behaviour change, and yes, the new behaviour is
>> better, but it is really different class.
>
>Sometimes the old behavior is something that is a major pain for users
>and
>userspace.  In that case, where the new behavior fixes really annoying
>usecase bugs, the fix belongs in -stable IMHO.
>
>Broken behavior hits, by definition, every user of the feature after
>all.

How is this behavior affecting users with this hardware today? How does it manifest? Does it make for a bad or non-functional user experience? Again, I should have pressed for more complete commit messages, apologies for that.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
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/