linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the aio tree with the vfs tree

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: <20160315083754.GA12196@lst.de>
Date:	Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:37:54 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the aio tree with the vfs tree

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:24:38AM -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 08:35:23AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The aio changes have either been reviewed negatively or not at all.  That 
> > tree should be dropped.
> 
> That isn't solely your decision.  If you have comments, please provide 
> constructive feedback, as there are users and use-cases that need this 
> kind of functionality.

Nothing should be a "sole decision".  But you have patches that stomp
all over areas outside your maintainership, and even those in there
aren't reviewed.  This does not fit the Linux-next criteria.