linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.2 000/413] 5.2.3-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: <20190725205701.GF18612@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:57:01 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>,
        wanpengli@...cent.com,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        patches@...nelci.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        linux- stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, jmattson@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.2 000/413] 5.2.3-stable review

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 03:19:33PM -0500, Dan Rue wrote:
> I would still prefer to run the latest tests against all kernel versions
> (but better control when we upgrade it). Like I said, we can handle
> expected failures, and it would even help to validate backports for
> fixes that do get backported. I'm afraid on your behalf that snapping
> (and maintaining) branches per kernel branch is going to be a lot to
> manage.

Having the branches would be beneficial for kernel developers as well,
e.g. on multiple occasions I've spent time hunting down non-existent KVM
bugs, only to realize my base kernel was stale with respect to kvm-unit-tests.

My thought was to have a mostly-unmaintained branch for each major kernel
version, e.g. snapshot a working version of kvm_unit_tests when the KVM
pull request for the merge window is sent, and for the most part leave it
at that.  I don't think it would introduce much overhead, but then again,
I'm not the person who would be maintaining this :-)