linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] sched/swait: Convert to full exclusive mode

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 21:43:48 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:     Andreas Grünbacher 
        <andreas.gruenbacher@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, quilt-dev@...gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] sched/swait: Convert to full exclusive mode

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:52 AM Andreas Grünbacher
> <andreas.gruenbacher@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Quilt uses those Content-Disposition headers to preserve the patch
> > filenames;
> 
> That' what I was assuming, but does anybody really care?

People might have scripts using it but I doubt anyone still relies on that
because git mail never did that inline/filename dance so scripts which
convert mboxes to quilt need to have a mechanism to create filenames
anyway. My personal script uses the subject line to create the filenames
and I never tried to use the inline filename as those filenames are often
enough complete garbage.

> (Even if they use quilt to manage patches, maybe they don't _send_
> them that way?)

Many quilt users still do.

> How long has quilt been doing it?

Forever.

> Also, note that I'm not at all sure that it's _just_ the
> 
>     Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> that triggers this. There might be something else in those emails that
> triggers it but that's the thing that stands out.

It is. There is nothing else in the headers which could cause that. quilt
mail format is pretty simplistic.

> > I'm not sure whose workflows would break if we kill those headers
> > altogether, but maybe we can omit them by default.
> 
> That would be lovely at least for my case.

No objections.

Thanks,

	tglx