linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] char-TPM: Adjustments for ten function implementations

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]

Date:   Tue, 17 Oct 2017 23:26:47 +1100
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
        Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>,
        Kenneth Goldman <kgold@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Peter Hüwe <PeterHuewe@....de>,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] char-TPM: Adjustments for ten function implementations

Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:56:42AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> 
>> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 09:35:12PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> > >
>> > > A minor complaint: all commits are missing "Fixes:" tag.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Fixes is only for bug fixes.  These don't fix any bugs.
>> 
>> 0-day seems to put Fixes for everything.  Should they be removed when the
>> old code is undesirable but doesn't actually cause a crash, eg out of date
>> API.
>
> Yeah, I feel like Fixes tags don't belong for API updates and cleanups.

I try to use the criteria of "if someone had backported commit A, would
they also want commit B" (where B Fixes: A).

So it's a bit broader than just "A had a *bug*" and this is the fix.

That's obviously still a bit of a slippery slope, but somewhat helpful I
think. eg, pretty much no one is interested in backporting spelling
fixes, so those aren't Fixes.

And generally people aren't interested in backporting commits like these
ones that just update coding style.

cheers