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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <nzk5uzpwqqkflmdgfe7kwsnsecqnsn6vsyo4ycoaueasnud6ot@pg6cazrf6zuf>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 19:14:18 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, 
	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: objtool/urgent] objtool, pwm: mediatek: Prevent
 theoretical divide-by-zero in pwm_mediatek_config()

Hello Ingo,

On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 12:00:59PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > I wonder a bit about procedures here. While I like that warnings that 
> > pop up in drivers/pwm (and elsewhere) are cared for, I think that the 
> > sensible way to change warning related settings is to make it hard to 
> > enable them first (harder than "depends on !COMPILE_TEST" "To avoid 
> > breaking bots too badly") and then work on the identified problems 
> > before warning broadly. The way chosen here instead seems to be 
> > enabling the warning immediately and then post fixes to the warnings 
> > and merge them without respective maintainer feedback in less than 12 
> > hours.
> 
> As I indicated elsewhere in this thread, it's a WIP branch, so we'll 

That sounds as if I should know that. But it's neither in the part of
the thread that I was Cc:d, nor in the cover letter.

> rebase it if/as we get feedback from maintainers: fix or skip the patch 
> on negative feedback, adding in tags on positive feedback.
> 
> Does this particular patch look good to you?

I fail to see an urgency and so think this patch should better go via
the pwm tree. Do you consider it urgent (as the branch name suggests)?
Or is this v6.16 material?

> > > Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@...nel.org> (maintainer:PWM SUBSYSTEM)
> > > Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/fb56444939325cc173e752ba199abd7aeae3bf12.1742852847.git.jpoimboe@kernel.org
> 
> I've also tentatively added your Acked-by, if that's OK with you.

The patch is OK. Iff you can convince me that it should go via tip, it's
fine for me.

Best regards
Uwe

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ