linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] vfs netfs

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: <20241120-abermals-inkrafttreten-8b838a76833f@brauner>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:49:51 +0100
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] vfs netfs

On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 10:29:42AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 06:00, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > A pidfs patch ended up in the branch and I didn't notice it. I decided
> > to leave it in here instead of rebasing the whole branch.
> 
> What happened here?

The base of the branch is definitely v6.12-rc1. The branch is simply
vfs.netfs with vfs-6.13.netfs tag. And the branch looks perfectly fine.

I think the issue was that I sent you the fixes tag you mention below
that contained some fixes that were in vfs.netfs. So afterwards I just
didn't rebase vfs.netfs but merged two other series on top of it with
v6.12-rc1 as parent. And I think that might've somehow confused the git
request-pull call.

Rebasing would've been the cleaner thing here since I had a long time
until the merge window. But other than that it doesn't look like I did
something that was actively wrong? But I might just be missing
something.

> 
> Not only isn't there a pidfs patch in here, it also doesn't have the
> afs patches you claim it has, because all of those came in long ago in
> commit a5f24c795513: "Pull vfs fixes from Christian Brauner".
> 
> So I've pulled this, but your pull request was all wonky because you
> used some odd base commit.
> 
>               Linus