linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for 4.7-rc1

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: <CA+55aFxZRUn333pP3fNN9NDLxp_JiZu+=vJH=k6gohQtDQRA5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 26 May 2016 14:18:37 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Sage Weil <sweil@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ceph-devel <ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for 4.7-rc1

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> How about the things like followups to earlier merges?

Small and obvious follow-ups are fine. What I really hated about this
ceph pull request was that it was multiple thousand lines of changes,
with no previous work or warning, and effectively no time in
linux-next.

Your for-linus branch is three small commits that actually restore old
functionality (well, one of them is documentetion) that got removed by
the big stuff you sent early (*).

So not at all the same kind of thing, and not problematic at all.

              Linus

(*) thanks, btw - you used to be one of the late people, now lately
you've been one of the early ones.