linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/23] Use asm-generic for mmu

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: <CAK8P3a1XqhV+7OVgWhGg3az4Y+_6V-mCjcJ1dBenwD+ZUaaT9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Oct 2020 16:01:22 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/23] Use asm-generic for mmu_context no-op functions

On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:27 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 00:15:16 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > It would be nice to be able to modify mmu_context functions or add a
> > hook without updating all architectures, many of which will be no-ops.
> >
> > The motivation for this series is a change to lazy mmu handling, but
> > this series stands on its own as a good cleanup whether or not we end
> > up making that change.
> >
> > [...]
>
> Applied to asm-generic, thanks!

Hi Nick,

I just noticed a fatal mistake I made when pushing it to the branch on
kernel.org: I used to have both a 'master' and an 'asm-generic' branch
in asm-generic.git but tried to remove the 'master' one as there is not
really any point in having two.

Unfortunately I forgot to check which one of the two was part of
linux-next, and it was the other one, so none of the patches I picked
up ever saw any wider testing aside from the 0day bot building it
(successfully).

Are there other changes that depend on this? If not, I would
just wait until -rc1 and then either push the branch correctly or
rebase the patches on that first, to avoid pushing something that
did not see the necessary testing.

      Arnd