linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/29] 4.4.48-stable review

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170208200721.GB11576@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Feb 2017 21:07:21 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
Cc:     "kernelci.org bot" <bot@...nelci.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux@...ck-us.net,
        shuahkh@....samsung.com, patches@...nelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/29] 4.4.48-stable review

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:40:38AM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 05:27:32PM -0800, kernelci.org bot wrote:
> >> stable-rc boot: 517 boots: 0 failed, 498 passed with 19 offline (v4.4.47-30-gcd13c41318b2)
> >
> > Why is there almost double the number of "passed" systems here compared
> > to 4.9?
> 
> Mostly because our build systems are backlogged.
> 
> We want to reply to your stable review emails within a reasonable amount
> of time, so we reply with the results that we've received, even though
> some builds may have been delayed and/or some labs have not reported in
> their results.

Ah, that makes sense, thanks for letting me know.  And for running this,
it's much appreciated.

greg k-h