linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: erofs: fix compile error without built-in decompression support

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:   Mon, 30 Jul 2018 11:07:21 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
To:     Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>, Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@....com>
CC:     <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, <linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: erofs: fix compile error without built-in
 decompression support

Hi Xiang,

On 2018/7/30 10:32, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Hi Chao,
> 
> On 2018/7/30 10:07, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2018/7/29 13:34, Gao Xiang via Linux-erofs wrote:
>>> This patch fixes incorrect code snippets due to spilt code
>>> into small patches by mistake.
>>>
>>> Link: https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all/2018-July/050747.html
>>> Link: https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all/2018-July/050750.html
>>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>
>>> ---
>>>  I test several Kconfig option combinations and all these
>>> combinations are successfully compiled.
>>>
>>> Hi Chao,
>>>  Could you please review this two patches first before merging
>>> into staging-next tree?
>> Hi Xiang,
>>
>> For this compiler issue, I think we only need to cover erofs_shrink_workstation
>> with marco CONFIG_EROFS_FS_ZIP, other modification like symbol name change or
>> relocate erofs_shrink_workstation are with other reason, so how about separate
>> them into different patches?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
> 
> It seems that Greg merged this patch to staging-next yesterday, since it is a urgent fix
> (otherwise erofs cannot be compiled properly without CONFIG_EROFS_FS_ZIP, that is my fault).
> 
> I wrote in a patch yesterday becuase all the modifications have the same root cause ----
>     fix incorrect code snippets due to spilt code into small patches by mistake.
> 
> But you are right, it is more proper to spilt into two patches, let me resend these patches later
> (I don't know whether Greg will apply them... :-( sorry... )
> 
> I think in order to reduce Greg's patchwork burden, we could quickly review patches internally in linux-erofs first,
> tidy up in a patchset set and send to Greg in a series periodically (if patches are not urgent).
> 
> How do you think about it?

I agree with you, as we discussed offline, let's send patch to erofs mailing
list for review first, and keep all developing patches in erofs-dev branch as
long as possible, then periodically, submitting patches to Greg in batch, it can
reduce unneeded modification in staging-next tree. For urgent fix, we can speed
up the progress. :)

Thanks,

> 
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang
> 
> .
>