linux-kernel - Re: AUTOSEL process

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: <ZAu4GE0q4jzRI+F6@sol.localdomain>
Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:07:04 -0800
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: AUTOSEL process

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 07:41:31PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> 
> Well, probably more common is that prerequisites are in the same patchset, and
> the prerequisites are tagged for stable too.  Whereas AUTOSEL often just picks
> patch X of N.  Also, developers and maintainers who tag patches for stable are
> probably more likely to help with the stable process in general and make sure
> patches are backported correctly...
> 
> Anyway, the point is, AUTOSEL needs to be fixed to stop inappropriately
> cherry-picking patch X of N so often.
> 

... and AUTOSEL strikes again, with the 6.1 and 6.2 kernels currently crashing
whenever a block device is removed, due to patches 1 and 3 of a 3-patch series
being AUTOSEL'ed (on the same day I started this discussion, no less):

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/CAOCAAm4reGhz400DSVrh0BetYD3Ljr2CZen7_3D4gXYYdB4SKQ@mail.gmail.com/T/#u

Oh sorry, ignore this, it's just an anecdotal example.

- Eric