linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] SELinux patches for v5.7

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-=wgZ6WCa_8dK4=DBiFMqP5yHzmSgZHqdXuEqHUcejUtw2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Mar 2020 15:13:06 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:     selinux@...r.kernel.org,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] SELinux patches for v5.7

On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 5:38 PM Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>
> The merge conflict is in security/selinux/hooks.c and is against a
> binder fs name fix we sent during the v5.6-rcX cycle; the fixup is
> trivial but if you need me to fix it, let me know.

No problem, it was as trivial as you said, and I don't think I screwed it up.

I appreciate the heads-up, though, since not only does it mean I don't
get nasty surprises, it also means that I get that warm and fuzzy
feeling of knowing you're on the ball..

> The maintainer
> screw-up deals with the second patch from the top of the pull request,
> the NFS fix.  The screw-up isn't the fact that this is a NFS patch, we
> talked to the NFS guys and they are okay with it.  The issue is that
> the commit date is today - during the merge window - which doesn't
> reflect the testing the patch received.  The reality is that I merged
> this patch back on March 12th, and it has been part of our testing
> ever since, but when putting this pull request together I noticed that
> I had dropped the subject line from the patch when I was merging it.
> Not wanting a malformed commit, I popped the top two patches from the
> stack and restored the missing subject line; this had the unfortunate
> side effect of making it look like the two top patches were just
> merged today - my apologies.

Again, this is very much the way to let me know, so that I don't get
that uneasy feeling about anything.

Thanks.

               Linus