linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] x86/purgatory: Make sure we fail the build if purgatory.ro has missing symbols

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: <20200312144922.GG15619@zn.tnic>
Date:   Thu, 12 Mar 2020 15:49:22 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] x86/purgatory: Make sure we fail the build if
 purgatory.ro has missing symbols

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 03:38:22PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> So I've send out 2 versions, not 5 not 10, but only 2 versions in
> the past 2 days and you start complaining about me rushing this and
> not fixing it properly, to me that does not come across positive.

Maybe there's a misunderstanding: when you send a patchset which is not
marked RFC, I read this, as, this patchset is ready for application. But
then the 0day bot catches build errors which means, not ready yet.

And I believe you expected for the 0day bot to test the patches first
and they should then to be considered for application. Yes, no?

That's why I suggested you to do randconfig builds yourself and not
depend on the 0day bot as it is known to be unreliable.

So I didn't do anything to make you feel negative - definitely not
intentionally.

> More specifically my intentions / motives on this were well intended
> and I too believe in fixing things the proper way. Your reply suggested
> that I just want to rush this through, which calls my motives into
> question, for which in my mind there was no reason.
> 
> If you complain about 2 versions in 2 days, or 5 versions over 5 months
> then that feels exaggerated and it certainly does not give me a feeling
> that the effort which I'm putting into this is being appreciated.

I believe I already explained what my problem with that is. If you don't
see it, then let's agree to disagree.

> Anyways we have a plan how to move forward with this now, so lets
> focus on that.

Yes, let's do that.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette