linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/59] 4.9.226-rc2 review

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:   Wed, 1 Jul 2020 08:55:10 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
Cc:     Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/59] 4.9.226-rc2 review

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:46:34PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > >FWIW, if we need/want to use unified assembler in v4.9.y, shouldn't all unified
> > >assembler patches be applied ?
> > 
> > We don't - I took 71f8af111010 as a dependency rather than on its own
> > merit.
> 
> Would it be possible to somehow mark patches that are "dependency"
> rather than "on their own"? It would make review easier...

That's a lot of extra work on our part, and would make the changelog
text change, which isn't always liked, sorry.

greg k-h