linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] libnvdimm for v5.8-rc2

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 22 Jun 2020 12:39:24 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] libnvdimm for v5.8-rc2

Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> writes:
> Hi Linus, please pull from:
>
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nvdimm/nvdimm
> tags/libnvdimm-for-5.8-rc2
>
> ...to receive a feature (papr_scm health retrieval) and a fix (sysfs
> attribute visibility) for v5.8.
>
> Vaibhav explains in the merge commit below why missing v5.8 would be
> painful and I agreed to try a -rc2 pull because only cosmetics kept
> this out of -rc1 and his initial versions were posted in more than
> enough time for v5.8 consideration.
>
> ===
>     These patches are tied to specific features that were committed to
>     customers in upcoming distros releases (RHEL and SLES) whose time-lines
>     are tied to 5.8 kernel release.
>
>     Being able to track the health of an nvdimm is critical for our
>     customers that are running workloads leveraging papr-scm nvdimms.
>     Missing the 5.8 kernel would mean missing the distro timelines and
>     shifting forward the availability of this feature in distro kernels by
>     at least 6 months.
> ===
>
> I notice that these do not have an ack from Michael, but I had been
> assuming that he was deferring this to a libnvdimm subsystem decision
> ever since v7 back at the end of May where he said "I don't have
> strong opinions about the user API, it's really up to the nvdimm
> folks." [1]

Yeah, sorry for not providing an actual ack, I didn't realise you were
planning to send it for 5.8.

The arch parts of that series are pretty boring plumbing of hypervisor
calls, so the important details were all the libnvdimm related issues
IMO.

So please consider this a belated ack and thanks for getting it merged.

cheers