linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: fix hugetlb page migration/fault race causing SIGBUS

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190812084524.GC5117@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Mon, 12 Aug 2019 10:45:24 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ltp@...ts.linux.it,
        Li Wang <liwang@...hat.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
        Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, xishi.qiuxishi@...baba-inc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: fix hugetlb page migration/fault race causing
 SIGBUS

On Sun 11-08-19 19:46:14, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 03:17:18PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 08:46:33 +0200 Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Maybe we should introduce the Fixes-no-stable: tag.  That should get
> > > > their attention.
> > > 
> > > No please, Fixes shouldn't be really tight to any stable tree rules. It
> > > is a very useful indication of which commit has introduced bug/problem
> > > or whatever that the patch follows up to. We in Suse are using this tag
> > > to evaluate potential fixes as the stable is not reliable. We could live
> > > with Fixes-no-stable or whatever other name but does it really makes
> > > sense to complicate the existing state when stable maintainers are doing
> > > whatever they want anyway? Does a tag like that force AI from selecting
> > > a patch? I am not really convinced.
> > 
> > It should work if we ask stable trees maintainers not to backport
> > such patches.
> > 
> > Sasha, please don't backport patches which are marked Fixes-no-stable:
> > and which lack a cc:stable tag.
> 
> I'll add it to my filter, thank you!

I would really prefer to stick with Fixes: tag and stable only picking
up cc: stable patches. I really hate to see workarounds for sensible
workflows (marking the Fixes) just because we are trying to hide
something from stable maintainers. Seriously, if stable maintainers have
a different idea about what should be backported, it is their call. They
are the ones to deal with regressions and the backporting effort in
those cases of disagreement.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs