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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 12:23:13 -0300 From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-ima-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org Subject: Re: Kexec regression in next-20160906 Am Mittwoch, 07 September 2016, 09:08:07 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux: > Any change to a UAPI header needs to be carefully considered and > questioned as it is always a potential userspace breakage - and in > the kernel, we're supposed to be doing our up-most to avoid > breaking userspace. > > It's not like it was in the old days when we didn't have the UAPI > seperate - today, we can find these things by looking at the patch > diffstat and seeing whether any file in "uapi" is touched. That > should be the trigger for a really in-depth review of the change. No UAPI header is touched by this patch series. That is because there are two definitions of struct kexec_segment, one in include/linux/kexec.h and the other one in include/uapi/linux/kexec.h. My patch changed the former. I was unaware of the second definition in the latter. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center
Powered by blists - more mailing lists