linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes

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: <20251214080819.GAaT5wcwH1FuaVU2CX@renoirsky.local>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2025 09:08:19 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes

On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 08:51:53AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> It's Linus's preference: a couple of years ago, when I did something
> similar to what you did here Linus requested that fixes with -stable
> tags not live in -next indefinitely, but be sent to his tree.
> -next should not be a dumping ground for long-term testing.

Well, this is a question for the maintainers summit but that just ended...

The stable tag is the sure-fire way which the stable team uses to know
that a patch needs to be picked up. If you remove the stable tag, I now
have to pay attention when it goes upstream that I need to send it to
them unless the AI picks it up.

And this fix is special as I already explained.

> If a fix is important enough to get a -stable tag, it should go
> upstream sooner rather than later.

Read upthread what I already explained. Sometimes our rules could use an
exception.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette