linux-kernel - Re: [PULL REQUEST] nfsd changes for 4.15

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

Message-ID: <20171119232037.6a719dec@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Sun, 19 Nov 2017 23:20:37 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
        Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@...app.com>,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] nfsd changes for 4.15

Hi Linus,

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 11:40:44 -0800 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:40 AM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org> wrote:
> > Please pull nfsd changes for 4.15 from:  
> 
> Hmm. This had a tracepoint conflict with the nfs client pull.
> 
> The resolution seems obvious and I did it, but I'd like people to
> review the end result but particularly also their workflows, because I
> don't think that conflict was reported anywhere and doesn't seem to
> exist in next-20171115.
> 
> It certainly wasn't mentioned to me in either pull request.
> 
> Were the nfs client changes not in next?

They were not :-(
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell