linux-kernel - Re: Trial of conflict resolution of Alan's patch

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: <20180216165301.GF3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Feb 2018 08:53:01 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
        will.deacon@....com, peterz@...radead.org, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        npiggin@...il.com, dhowells@...hat.com, j.alglave@....ac.uk,
        luc.maranget@...ia.fr, Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Subject: Re: Trial of conflict resolution of Alan's patch

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 04:47:04PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:18:34AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2018, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > My forward-port patch doesn't apply to the "lkmm" branch.
> > > It looks like "linux-kernel-hardware.cat" is intentionally omitted there.
> > > Am I guessing right?
> > > 
> > > If this is the case, I can prepare a patch to be applied to "lkmm".
> > > But I can't compose a proper change log. So I'd like Alan to post
> > > a patch with my SOB appended. Does this approach sound reasonable?
> > 
> > The patch is not yet ready to be merged.  At the very least, I need to
> > include an update to explanation.txt along with it.  When it is all 
> > ready, I will rebase it on Paul's repository and post it.
> > 
> > Which reminds me: Now that the material has been accepted into the 
> > kernel, do we need to keep the github repository?  It has the 
> > linux-kernel-hardware.cat file, but otherwise it seems to be redundant.
> 
> If you mean "to keep up-to-date", I'd say "No, we don't..."  ;-)
> 
> My plan/hope is to add such a disclaimer together with a pointer
> to Linus's tree ASAP...

I agree that the github repository is useful as a historical reference
but that we should not try to keep it up to date.  The -rc1 release
came out last Sunday, so in 7-8 weeks we will hopefully have this in
the Linux kernel.  Fingers firmly crossed and all that...

							Thanx, Paul