linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] autofs: show pipe inode in mount options

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]

Date:	Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:55:56 +0800
From:	Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	skinsbursky@...tuozzo.com, criu@...nvz.org, autofs@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs: show pipe inode in mount options

On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 15:48 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:19:07 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <
> sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Ian,
> > 
> > On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 08:30:17 +0800 Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > I haven't had anything significant enough for autofs to warrant
> > > maintaining a tree and sending push requests so I'll need to ask
> > > Stephen what I need to do (perhaps you could offer some advise on
> > > that
> > > now Stephen, please).
> > 
> > I guess if its just a few patches every now and then, then Andrew
> > Morton may be the best person to shepherd them upstream.
> 
> yup, send 'em along.
> 
> I actually was handling the autofs4 stuff back in 2014 for a bit.

Thanks Andrew.

Last time I tried to send the module rename series we got confused some
how, patches not seen leading to conflicts in applying later patches
IIRC, which lead to the recommendation I send them to linux-next.

The series has grown a bit too now but I'm thinking I should send them
in smaller groups, such as coding style fixes and white space fixes,
change to use pr* logging, etc.

Hopefully that will make the process much more straight forward.

The thing is the patches are mostly not urgent which is why I keep
postponing sending them when higher priority things come up.

As for the patch from Stanislav, I'll put that at the top of my patch
queue, have a quick look at it and send it over so that, hopefully, it
can get merged.

I'll probably send a couple of others too to get things going on with
(what I'm calling) the module rename series.

Ian