linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the erofs tree

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: <20200529143613.GE23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 29 May 2020 15:36:13 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@...hat.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Gao Xiang <xiang@...nel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@...ernel.net>,
        Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the erofs tree

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:40:07AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:

> I'm fine with that, although I think it's mainly with vfs changes
> so could be better though with vfs tree. I will add this patch
> tomorrow anyway... Thanks for reminder!

FWIW, my reasoning here is
	* erofs tree exists and
	* the patch is erofs-specific, affects nothing outside and
has no dependencies with anything currently done in VFS or in other
filesystems and
	* it does have (trivial) conflicts with the stuff in
erofs tree

So putting it into erofs tree would seem to be an obvious approach -
minimizes the amount of cross-tree dependencies and headache for
everyone involved...

I'm dropping it from #work.misc and #for-next now.