linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] add generic builtin command line

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:   Tue, 16 Feb 2021 18:42:47 +0100
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To:     Daniel Gimpelevich <daniel@...pelevich.san-francisco.ca.us>
Cc:     Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Maksym Kokhan <maksym.kokhan@...ballogic.com>,
        Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, xe-linux-external@...co.com,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
        Daniel Walker <danielwa@...co.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] add generic builtin command line

Daniel Gimpelevich <daniel@...pelevich.san-francisco.ca.us> a écrit :

> On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 15:15 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 08:13:08 -0700 Daniel Walker <danielwa@...co.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:14:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> > > The patches (or some version of them) are already in linux-next,
>> > > which messes me up.  I'll disable them for now.
>> >
>> > Those are from my tree, but I remove them when you picked up the  
>> series. The
>> > next linux-next should not have them.
>>
>> Yup, thanks, all looks good now.
>
> This patchset is currently neither in mainline nor in -next. May I ask
> what happened to it? Thanks.

As far as I remember, there has been a lot of discussion around this series.

As of today, it doesn't apply cleanly anymore and would require rebasing.

I'd suggest also to find the good arguments to convince us that this  
series has a real added value, not just "cisco use it in its kernels  
so it is good".

I proposed an alternative at  
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/cover/cover.1554195798.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr/ but never got any feedback so I gave  
up.

If you submit a new series, don't forget to copy ppclinux-dev and  
linux-arch lists.

Christophe