linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: peaq-wmi: Add DMI check before binding to the WMI interface

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: <CAHp75VdBVjL8Pg2CY2HKnzHKgazB4v-BTHtWQZYt86psC=7_8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Oct 2017 21:12:39 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: peaq-wmi: Add DMI check before binding to
 the WMI interface

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 05-10-17 19:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:

>> ... however, the patch can't be dropped.
>>
>> Either me, or you in v2 need to revert it. Tell me what you prefer here.

> Isn't the whole purpose of having a testing branch that patches can
> actually be dropped. AFAIK this has not even hit -next yet, so IMHO
> it should just be dropped ?

It used to be until the problem had been discovered, i.e. absence of
committer's Signed-off-by.

So, starting from this cycle testing branch is categorized as
'published' where we can't do any non-fast-forward work anymore.

> If it really should be reverted instead I'll leave doing a revert up
> to you.

I heard you.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko