linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 04/19] iov_iter: Turn iov_iter_fault_in_readable into fault_in_iov_iter

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: <CAHk-=wh-TeAeraYo9jM7FsAVDtfCji_5ao=B3eoO10Sf2SdeTA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 28 Aug 2021 10:13:11 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Kari Argillander <kari.argillander@...il.com>
Cc:     Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
        Konstantin Komarov <almaz.alexandrovich@...agon-software.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        cluster-devel <cluster-devel@...hat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, ntfs3@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/19] iov_iter: Turn iov_iter_fault_in_readable into fault_in_iov_iter_readable

On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 1:56 PM Kari Argillander
<kari.argillander@...il.com> wrote:
>
> At least this patch will break ntfs3 which is in next. It has been there
> just couple weeks so I understand. I added Konstantin and ntfs3 list so
> that we know what is going on. Can you please info if and when do we
> need rebase.

No need to rebase. It just makes it harder for me to pick one pull
over another, since it would mix the two things together.

I'll notice the semantic conflict as I do my merge build test, and
it's easy for me to fix as part of the merge - whichever one I merge
later.

It's good if both sides remind me about the issue, but these kinds of
conflicts are not a problem.

And yes, it does happen that I miss conflicts like this if I merge
while on the road and don't do my full build tests, or if it's some
architecture-specific thing or a problem that doesn't happen on my
usual allmodconfig testing.  But neither of those cases should be
present in this situation.

                    Linus