linux-kernel - Re: e827091cb1 "block: merge: get the 1st and last bvec via helpers" broken

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: <56E486BB.8030103@kernel.dk>
Date:	Sat, 12 Mar 2016 14:14:35 -0700
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
Cc:	Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
	Ming Lin <mlin@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: e827091cb1 "block: merge: get the 1st and last bvec via helpers"
 broken

On 03/12/2016 12:51 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> I am fine with either way, and I will prepare one patch and let Jens
>> decide.
>
> So guys, this needs to be done *now*.
>
> And Jens - this is the last time I believe you when you say late
> patches are required.
>
> The buggy patch that introduced this problem was part of that very
> late pull request that I already rejected once, and you then claimed
> was absolutely required.
>
> So the dicking around with the block layer stops *now*.
>
> Seriously. I'm pissed off.

Believe me, I'm as impressed as you are...

I've queued it up and will run it through testing and send it off later. 
I still think it's better to apply the fix, rather than revert the 
original change.

> I don't want to see anything even half-way questionable during the
> whole next release window. Not even during the merge window. You need
> to do some serious quality control, and re-think the whole "large
> changes" model.

The timing was the issue here, and yeah, it didn't work out well this 
time at all. It's a momentary lapse, we'll get it sorted for sure.

-- 
Jens Axboe