linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] f2fs: make kobj

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: <10a80557-50f6-f563-56ca-eb3df7e4ea93@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2023 22:43:54 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
To:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: make kobj_type structures constant

On 2023/2/15 2:07, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 02/14, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2023/2/14 1:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> On 02/13, Chao Yu wrote:
>>>> On 2023/2/9 11:20, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
>>>>> Since commit ee6d3dd4ed48 ("driver core: make kobj_type constant.")
>>>>> the driver core allows the usage of const struct kobj_type.
>>>>>
>>>>> Take advantage of this to constify the structure definitions to prevent
>>>>> modification at runtime.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
>>>
>>> Hi Chao,
>>>
>>> Note that, next time, I won't apply/modify any patches merged in -dev,
>>> unless it has a problem.
>>
>> Hi Jaegeuk,
>>
>> Oh, any particular reason, to avoid unneeded commit id change when the time is
>> close to merge window?
> 
> Hi Chao,
> 
> I'm trying to avoid breaking the -next branch.

Jaegeuk, so why do we need to avoid breaking -next branch? I didn't get it. :-(

> 
>>
>> Is there any period of grace before merging patches from dev-test branch into dev
>> branch? Maybe a week is reasonable? so I may have time to catch up in time.
> 
> No rule, but I'm trying to wait for several days while running my local tests.
> If the patch looks okay, sometimes I'll queue it right away.

Sure, not problem.

Thanks,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,