linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 01/30] x86/mm: Fix warning on build with X86_MEM

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: <Yh3d8Trp4ZCmdOW2@nazgul.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 1 Mar 2022 09:48:49 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, luto@...nel.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com,
        aarcange@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com,
        david@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, jgross@...e.com,
        jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org, knsathya@...nel.org,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, sdeep@...are.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
        tony.luck@...el.com, vkuznets@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com,
        thomas.lendacky@....com, brijesh.singh@....com, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 01/30] x86/mm: Fix warning on build with
 X86_MEM_ENCRYPT=y

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 09:11:59AM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> People rely on the "Fixes:" tag for actual bug fixes.  Using it here --
> along with the rest of the "this is fixing a bug" tone of the title and
> description -- is guaranteed to confuse stable maintainers and distros
> doing backports.

Yes, they very much do. There's even automatic tools which look at Fixes
and give people work. So yeah, pls don't take this lightly.

> I would call it misinformation.  How is that useful?
> 
> It's ok to reference a related commit in the patch description itself.
> Just don't abuse the "Fixes" tag.
> 
> But IMO, for the least amount of confusion, it makes more sense to
> squash this with the patch which actually requires it.

Full ack. Please squash it into the patch which causes the issue. And
frankly, I don't understand why you guys are making such a fuss about it
and why this needs to be a separate patch, at all?!

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette