linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drbd: fix discard_zeroes_if

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: <alpine.LRH.2.11.1801170041330.27949@mail.ewheeler.net>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jan 2018 00:43:35 +0000 (UTC)
From:   Eric Wheeler <drbd-dev@...ts.ewheeler.net>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc:     drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Philipp Reisner <philipp.reisner@...bit.com>,
        Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@...bit.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drbd: fix discard_zeroes_if_aligned regression

On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> NAK.  Calling a discard and expecting zeroing is simply buggy.

But of course, that would be silly.

We don't expect discard to zero---but we do expect discard to discard!

> And double NAK for patches like this without a linux-block Cc.

My appologies, I thought this was internal to DRBD.  

What is the general rule here?

Should linux-block always be Cc'ed with a patch?

--
Eric Wheeler