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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201010130230.69e5c1a5@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Sat, 10 Oct 2020 13:02:30 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/23] Use asm-generic for mmu_context no-op
 functions

Hi Arnd,

On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 16:01:22 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> 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.

If it is useful enough (or important enough), then put in in your
linux-next included branch, but don't ask Linus to merge it until the
second week of the merge window ... no worse than some other stuff I
see :-(

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped