linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/11] cleanups and unit test for mballoc

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:   Thu, 31 Aug 2023 20:05:35 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
To:     Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@...weicloud.com>, tytso@....edu,
        adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/11] cleanups and unit test for mballoc

Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@...weicloud.com> writes:

> on 8/30/2023 3:02 AM, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>> Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@...weicloud.com> writes:
>> 
>>> v5-v6:
>>>
>> 
>> Hi Kemeng,
>> 
>> Sorry for the delay in getting started on this. I am going through the
>> series now.
>> 
>>> 1. Separate block bitmap and buddy bitmap freeing in individual patch
>>> and rewrite the descriptions.
>>> 2. Remove #ifdef around KUNIT_STATIC_STUB_REDIRECT which should be
>>> only defined when CONFIG_KUNIT is enabled after fix [7] which was merged
>>> into kunit-next/kunit
> Hi ritesh, thanks for feedback. I think the compilation problem below is
> relevant to this change which relie on fix [7]. I'm not sure if I need to
> include fix [7] in this set to fix the compilation error. Would like to
> hear any advise!
>

No, we need not include [7] in this series. I should have noticed that
in your above updates. I generally also provide a separate note or at
the top section about which branch and/or changes are requried for
testing the patch series, hence I overlooked it.

Thanks for pointing out.

-ritesh