linux-kernel - Re: [GIT] Networking

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+55aFy5op-iZq2CJsPiinSXOJZ6TqBoxA6VwKKELCbhDH-Psg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:19:50 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 3:33 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> Highlights:

Lowlights:

 1) it duplicated a commit from the hrtimer tree, which had been
cleaned up and rewritten, but then merging the second copy of the
commit re-introduced the bad code that had been cleaned up.

I'm talking about commits

 - 7d9285e82db5:
      perf/bpf: Extend the perf_event_read_local() interface, a.k.a.
"bpf: perf event change needed for subsequent bpf helpers"
 - 97562633bcba
      bpf: perf event change needed for subsequent bpf helpers

where apparently there was no discussion between the groups about the
subsequent changes.

And this must have shown up in linux-next as a conflict, but no
mention of it from either the perf event tree or the networking tree
merge.

Although it is of course possible that depending on merge order, the
problem never showed up in next.

            Linus