linux-kernel - Re: move block bits out of fs.h

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]

Date:   Wed, 24 Jun 2020 17:14:54 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: move block bits out of fs.h

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 09:14:11AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 6/24/20 9:12 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 09:09:42AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> Applied for 5.9 - I kept this in a separate topic branch, fwiw. There's the
> >> potential for some annoying issues with this, so would rather have it in
> >> a branch we can modify easily, if we need to.
> > 
> > Hmm, I have a bunch of things building on top of this pending, so that
> > branch split will be interesting to handle.
> 
> We can stuff it in for-5.9/block, but then I'd rather just rebase that
> on 5.8-rc2 now since it's still early days. If we don't, we already
> have conflicts...

I'll happily rebase.  rc1 also has funny ext4 warnings which are
pretty annoying.