linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.8 000/118] 5.8.11-rc1 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200923110047.GA3340140@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Sep 2020 13:00:47 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, patches@...nelci.org,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.8 000/118] 5.8.11-rc1 review

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 08:44:29PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 6:47 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.8.11 release.
> > There are 118 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> >
> > Responses should be made by Wed, 23 Sep 2020 16:20:12 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 
> > Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> >     dax: Fix compilation for CONFIG_DAX && !CONFIG_FS_DAX
> >
> > Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> >     dm: Call proper helper to determine dax support
> 
> Perhaps it would be wise to hold-off a bit on backporting these, until
> they have received more testing?

Seems to be passing all of the testing bots we have thrown at it :)

thanks,

greg k-h