linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] COVER: Remove memcpy_page

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: <20230317144803.kktahbp4fhmkutsq@meerkat.local>
Date:   Fri, 17 Mar 2023 10:48:03 -0400
From:   Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
Cc:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] COVER: Remove memcpy_page_flushcache()

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 09:16:34AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > It's also much easier to run git-send-email HEAD^^^, rather than running
> > it three separate times, let alone if it's a 20 patch series.
> 
> Exactly.  And I'm using b4 which would have forced me to create a separate
> branch for each of the patches to track.  So I was keeping them around in
> a single branch to let 0day run after the merge window.  Then I forgot
> about the idea of splitting them because b4 had it all packaged up nice!
> 
> > 
> > I wonder if we could come up with some convention to indicate that a
> > series is made up of independent patches, and maintainers are free to
> > pick them individually - but still sent as a single series.
> 
> Maybe.  But perhaps b4 could have a send option which would split them
> out?  I'll see about adding an option to b4 but I've Cc'ed Konstantin as
> well for the idea.

Yes, I plan to introduce the concept of "bundles" in addition to "series". The
distinction is that when you send a bundle, each patch is sent as individual
submission and we generate the change-id for each patch. It's a bit more work
to send a v2 of some patch (you have to do a "prep -n --from-thread <msgid>"),
but it's not insurmountable and should help with queuing up individual patches
for sending post merge-window, like in your case.

-K