linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/APM: drop the duplicate APM_MINOR

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a510e9bd-ea17-dc43-9985-0c7fcec4b245@infradead.org>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jul 2023 17:58:47 -0700
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/APM: drop the duplicate APM_MINOR_DEV macro



On 7/27/23 15:41, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/27/23 15:05, Sohil Mehta wrote:
>> On 7/27/2023 2:21 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> On 7/27/23 13:06, Sohil Mehta wrote:
>>>> I am not sure if a Fixes tag is really needed for a redundant macro
>>>> definition. If at all, shouldn't it be 874bcd00f520c ("apm-emulation:
>>>> move APM_MINOR_DEV to include/linux/miscdevice.h") ?
>>>
>>> I don't see any need for this patch to be backported.
>>>
>>> Should it be commit 874bcd00f520c?  Maybe. That one certainly
>>> missed moving this macro.
>>>
>>
>> Also, applying this patch anytime before 874bcd00f520c will cause a
>> compilation issue unless 874bcd00f520c is applied as well.
> 
> Yeah, that's a good point. Thanks.
> 

I'll send a v2 with the Fixes: tag changed.
Thanks.

-- 
~Randy