linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] In-place module initialisation

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: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:26:02 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Valentin Obst <kernel@...entinobst.de>
Cc: a.hindborg@...sung.com, alex.gaynor@...il.com, aliceryhl@...gle.com, 
	benno.lossin@...ton.me, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, boqun.feng@...il.com, 
	gary@...yguo.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ojeda@...nel.org, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, walmeida@...rosoft.com, wedsonaf@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] In-place module initialisation

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 3:00 PM Valentin Obst <kernel@...entinobst.de> wrote:
>
> If I interpret the docs correctly, previous patches in the same series are
> only implicitly considered as prerequisites for the marked patch if they
> are marked themselves:
>
>     "[...] you do not have to list patch1 as prerequisite of patch2
>     if you have already marked patch1 for stable inclusion."

Right, "Cc: stable" would be needed in both 1/5 and 2/5 (but one could
remove the "# ..." comments in that case, i.e. it seems simpler).

Cheers,
Miguel