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: <CA+55aFy2v3OW+mmSDF4MPWW673WsJEdQef3LChWg5k9=_k9ggg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 11:13:29 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     kiran.modukuri@...il.com, linux-cachefs@...hat.com,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] fscache and cachefiles fixes

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 7:02 AM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Can you pull these fixes for fscache and cachefiles please?

I've pulled them, but I'm not happy about it. They are all *very* new.

Why do they have commit times literally *minutes* before your email to
ask me to pull?

What kind of testing have these gotten?

Seriously, if I get a pull request with commits this new, I want to
have an *explanation*. The explanation could be "I use quilt, and this
underwent lots of testing outside of git", but the explanation should
be there!

I took them because they look simple enough, but that still leaves me grumpy.

                   Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ