linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1

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:   Tue, 19 Mar 2019 09:40:07 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] HMM updates for 5.1

On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:04:04 -0400 Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:10:04AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 21:27:06 -0400 Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Andrew you will not be pushing this patchset in 5.1 ?
> > 
> > I'd like to.  It sounds like we're converging on a plan.
> > 
> > It would be good to hear more from the driver developers who will be
> > consuming these new features - links to patchsets, review feedback,
> > etc.  Which individuals should we be asking?  Felix, Christian and
> > Jason, perhaps?
> > 
> 
> So i am guessing you will not send this to Linus ?

I was waiting to see how the discussion proceeds.  Was also expecting
various changelog updates (at least) - more acks from driver
developers, additional pointers to client driver patchsets, description
of their readiness, etc.

Today I discover that Alex has cherrypicked "mm/hmm: use reference
counting for HMM struct" into a tree which is fed into linux-next which
rather messes things up from my end and makes it hard to feed a
(possibly modified version of) that into Linus.

So I think I'll throw up my hands, drop them all and shall await
developments :(