linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG

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:   Wed, 29 Jun 2022 19:35:45 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
        Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        Hridya Valsaraju <hridya@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "Alex Xu (Hello71)" <alex_y_xu@...oo.ca>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@...ts.zx2c4.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove CONFIG_ANDROID

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:30:35PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> Properly resolved by whom? It sounds like you're up for intentionally
> allowing a userspace regression, and also volunteering other people's
> time into fixing that regression? The way I understand the kernel
> development process is that the person proposing a change is responsible
> for not intentionally causing regressions, and if one is pointed out, a
> v+1 of that patch is provided that doesn't cause the regression.

If you think the code does not work when the system frequently suspends
and resumes, then well it is broken already, as that can happen just
as much on non-Android systems.  So maybe we should just remove it if
it is so broken that you fear about regressions on the 3 and a half
Android systems in the world running an upstream kernel?