linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] xfs: new code for 5.13

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:19:04 -0700
From:   "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] xfs: new code for 5.13

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:50:51AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:06 AM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, some of our refactoring work collided with Miklos'
> > patchset that refactors FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS and FS_IOC_FS[GS]ETXATTR.
> 
> Ok, the resolution looked reasonably straightforward to me, and I
> ended up with what looks like the same end result you did.
> 
> But I only did a visual inspection of our --cc diffs (you seem to use
> --patience, which made my initial diff look different) and obviously
> verified that it all builds cleanly, I didn't do any actual testing.
> 
> So please double-check that everything still looks good,

At a first glance it looks good to me, thanks. :)

(Currently running fstests to double-check...)

--D

> 
>                  Linus