linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 015/161] printk: Add console owner and waiter logic to load balance console writes

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: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1804162326210.28129@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date:   Mon, 16 Apr 2018 23:28:44 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
cc:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL for 4.14 015/161] printk: Add console owner and
 waiter logic to load balance console writes

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Sasha Levin wrote:

> I agree that as an enterprise distro taking everything from -stable
> isn't the best idea. Ideally you'd want to be close to the first
> extreme you've mentioned and only take commits if customers are asking
> you to do so.
> 
> I think that the rule we're trying to agree upon is the "It must fix
> a real bug that bothers people".
> 
> I think that we can agree that it's impossible to expect every single
> Linux user to go on LKML and complain about a bug he encountered, so the
> rule quickly becomes "It must fix a real bug that can bother people".

So is there a reason why stable couldn't become some hybrid-form union of

- really critical issues (data corruption, boot issues, severe security 
  issues) taken from bleeding edge upstream
- [reviewed] cherry-picks of functional fixes from major distro kernels 
  (based on that very -stable release), as that's apparently what people 
  are hitting in the real world with that particular kernel

?

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs