linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Accept unaccepted kexec segments' destination addresses

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20250304155327.4499dcbbfa2445f76927c6c3@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 15:53:27 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov"
 <kirill@...temov.name>, ebiederm@...ssion.com, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
 Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, x86@...nel.org, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com,
 kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Accept unaccepted kexec segments' destination
 addresses

On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 15:43:53 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:12:27 +0800 Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 01/13/25 at 12:01pm, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 05:49:30PM +0800, Yan Zhao wrote:
> > > > Hi Eric,
> > > > 
> > > > This is a repost of the patch "kexec_core: Accept unaccepted kexec
> > > > destination addresses" [1], rebased to v6.13-rc2.
> > > 
> > > Can we get this patch applied?
> > 
> > This looks good to me. In v1, we have analyzed all other possible
> > solutions, however change in this patch seems the simplest and most
> > accepatable one. 
> > 
> > If Eric has no objection, maybe Andrew can help pick this into his tree.
> 
> OK, but that patch is the only thing in the world which is older than me.
> 
> Yan, can you please refresh, retest and resend?
> 
> Also, please consolidate the changelogging into a single email -
> a single-patch series with a coverletter is just weird.
> 
> Putting the [0/n] info into the singleton patch's changelog is more
> reader-friendly, and that's what counts, no?

Oh, I remember this patch.

Eric, your feedback has been unusably-by-me enigmatic :(

In fact the whole multi-month review discussion has been quite
indecisive.

Yan, please go back through the discussion and incorporate reviewer
feedback into the changelogs: describe the possible issues which people
have raised and your responses to those.  Then resend and then let us
restart the review process.  With less reviewer latency please!