linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/107] 4.9.120-stable review

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: <20180815191418.GD23260@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Aug 2018 21:14:19 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@...wrt.com>
Cc:     Sven Joachim <svenjoac@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/107] 4.9.120-stable review

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 08:27:00PM +0200, Sebastian Gottschall wrote:
> if i fix the other error (can be reproduced with disable smp on standard
> i386 build)
> 
> another raises up again related to smp. to be serious. this patchset of x86
> patches is absolutelly broken and put together without any care. not a
> simple compile test has been done

That's just not true at all.  Gift horse, mouth.

> sorry for beeing a little bit upset. i'm sure i will find other bugs if i go
> deeper

Testing is always great to have.  Perhaps just move to 4.14.y or Linus's
tree if 4.9 does not work for you?  THere's only so much testing we
could do before the embargo, sorry.  We are very lucky to even have
these patches for 4.9 in the first place.

thanks,

greg k-h