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: <54B05428.60303@nod.at>
Date:	Fri, 09 Jan 2015 23:20:24 +0100
From:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar>,
	dedekind1@...il.com
CC:	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fastmap update v2 (pile 1)

Am 09.01.2015 um 23:09 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia:
>> All of Pile1, 2, 3 and 4. :-)
>> One or tow patches are preparations for the real fix but obviously you'll need them
>> too.
>> The rest are enhancements and cleanups.
> 
> What do you mean by "the rest"?

Pile 5, 6, and 7.

>> As I wrote before I've structured the patch set in a way to make backporting easy.
>>
>>> For bugfixes, having a detailed explanation of the problem the commit is
>>> meant to fix would be better as well.
>>
>> Okay, I'll add the horror stories to these patches.
>>
> 
> I know it's a real pain, but if you can add a Fixes: tag, it would
> certainly help Artem track down the bug. The good thing is that you get
> the -stable hassle for free.

We cannot tag these as stable, first I have to inject old fastamp fixes
into -stable.
Two years ago Artem and I decided that fastmap as experimental feature does
not need -stable backports. It turned out that this was horrible wrong
and stupid.

>>> This patchset seems to have stalled, so perhaps having this information
>>> would help Artem to pick the ones that you point as fixes, before we
>>> miss another cycle.
>>
>> The question is, shall I wait for Artem or resend again?
> 
> Hm, well, given we are just a handful of developers, and we are all time
> constrained, maybe we could focus on the first two piles for now:
> 
> Pile 1, November 24, https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/24/324
> Pile 2, November 30, https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/30/50

Hmm, I'm not sure whether it is a good idea to resend Pile1 and Pile2.
I've currently around 50 patches on linux-mtd floating around (nett, without resends).
I fear it will just increase the mess we already have.

I really would like to hear what Artems plans are.
Actually I resent and split up the first series upon his request.

Thanks,
//richard
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ