linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 08/17] tpm: call tpm2_flush_space() on error in tpm_try

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]

Date:   Mon, 19 Nov 2018 14:57:04 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
        Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 08/17] tpm: call tpm2_flush_space() on error in
 tpm_try_transmit()

On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 06:21:57PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote:
> There's no "preferred" approach really. I try to warn about cases like
> this early because the response rates to Greg's "FAILED" email seem to
> be low - by the time they are sent out people are done with that code
> and have moved on.
> 
> In this scenario, for exmaple, this patch would not apply to any stable
> tree because it depends on a previous patch in this series that was not
> tagged for stable. My hopes are that if I warn you about this early you
> can work around this (for example, by marking that prior patch for
> stable as well) so you won't need to deal with this patch again in a few
> weeks.
> 
> There's no need to change anything about your flow if it works for you.

Ok, I see. Yeah, it is just how I organize my work. Rather solve the
patch dependency sudoku one time than two times.

When I maintain a subsystem I've thought that it is my responsibility to
always do that and not wait someone else to do it for me :-) That is the
responsibility part of the equation when you have the power to decide
what gets in.

Right now I have two failed merges in my queue that I plan to take care
of them next week.

> Thanks,
> Sasha

/Jarkko