linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL v2] FSI updates for 4.17

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]

Date:   Tue, 12 Jun 2018 22:40:06 +1000
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2]  FSI updates for 4.17

On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 13:44 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 
> > We are in regression only mode even before -rc1 these days ? including
> > for code that is basically completely unused upstream (which is what
> > this is trying to fix) ? :-) That's rather full-on ...
> 
> For code that goes into -rc1, it has to be in linux-next _BEFORE_ -final
> comes out.  That's been the rule for years, you should know that...

Oh I know and I also know that the rule was always somewhat flexible
for "new" drivers ;-) But heh, it's not biggie.

> > Anyway no biggie, it will just slow down some getting some of the other
> > drivers I suppose, though we can always explicitly list the dependency
> > on this tag to work around it.
> 
> There should not be a rush here, remember, kernel development does not
> have deadlines :)

Sort-of, it does make things difficult to have so much crap piling up
out of tree or in vendor trees as you well know, so the faster that
pile is sorted, the better everybody is. But I can deal with the
dependencies for 4.19 (assuming we get the 2 or 3 other drivers I want
to see upstream lined up as well in the next few weeks).

Cheers,
Ben.