linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180418103152.366b42c4@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:31:52 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Ahbong Chang <cwahbong@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@...gle.com>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 12:29:09 +0200
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 02:18:47AM +0000, Ahbong Chang wrote:
> > It does not fail with any config without this fix. This is for new work.  
> 
> Then why not submit it as part of the "new work" patch series?  That's
> how dependancies are normally handled.

I consider this patch making the kernel more robust. The reason I asked
was to know if it should be marked for stable or not. If nothing
currently relies on it, I just put it into the -rc as a "make the
kernel a little more robust" change. If other code relies on it, I
mark it for stable.

I'll take this patch as more of a clean up.

Thanks!

-- Steve