linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] locking changes for v5.2

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: <CAHk-=wifHYK-NKCTbT3_iHpy3QeK7H+=RLbFUaFpPziPn3O8Ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 May 2019 13:55:35 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Waiman Long <longman9394@...il.com>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] locking changes for v5.2

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 12:43 PM Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Sure - how close is this to a straight:
>
>         git revert 70800c3c0cc5

It's not really a revert. The code is different (and better) from the
straight revert, but perhaps equally importantly it also ends up with
a big comment about what's going on that made the original commit
wrong.

So I'd suggest just taking the patch as-is, and not calling it a
revert. It may revert to the original _model_ of wakup list traversal,
but it does so differently enough that the patch itself is not a
revert.

                 Linus