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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <f7bc085f-0b9f-68c6-5854-82a06a0636ca@dd-wrt.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:03:16 +0200
From:   Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@...wrt.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Sven Joachim <svenjoac@....de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, patches@...nelci.org,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/107] 4.9.120-stable review


Am 15.08.2018 um 22:42 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
>
> It would definitely be helpful, since I'm already quite busy with the
> normal merge window work. Having the embargo for L1TF end just as the
> merge window opened wasn't all that convenient.

all good so far. i checked them all and i will see how my nightly build 
goes out which does compilation on alot of
mips, arm, powerpc etc. platforms

>
> Of course, I have my own "I will delay 4.18 by a week" to blame for the timing.
>
> So if you can find the places that break, and add the right header,
> and send me a patch for all the ones you find, that would be lovely.
will do so. but for now it seems that this was really the only one
>
> It's not necessarilky always <linux/io.h> or <linux/irq.h> that makes
> sense to add as an include. As mentioned, sometimes it's
> <linux/slab.h> or similar.

mmh why? i prefer to include the correct header which references the 
function or macro instead of adding
a header which finds the right way by multiple iterations. its more 
transparent


Sebastian