linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/14] mm: turn on vm_fault

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: <20180516173445.GA6088@lst.de>
Date:   Wed, 16 May 2018 19:34:45 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...ts.orangefs.org,
        ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] mm: turn on vm_fault_t type checking

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:08:29AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> Uh, we're changing function signatures /and/ redefinining vm_fault_t?
> All in the same 90K patch?
> 
> I /was/ expecting a series of "convert XXXXX and all callers/users"
> patches followed by a trivial one to switch the definition, not a giant
> pile of change.  FWIW I don't mind so much if you make a patch
> containing a change for some super-common primitive and a hojillion
> little diff hunks tree-wide, but only one logical change at a time for a
> big patch, please...
> 
> I quite prefer seeing the whole series from start to finish all packaged
> up in one series, but wow this was overwhelming. :/

Another vote to split the change of the typedef, ok I get the message..