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]
Date:	Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:40:37 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <>
To:	David Miller <>
Subject: Re: net-2.6.24 plans

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:18:26 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <> wrote:

> From: David Miller <>
> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
> > Tomorrow (Monday) I want to rebase the net-2.6.24 tree one more time
> > to deal with all of the conflicts which exist between
> > linux-2.6/net-2.6 and net-2.6.24, but I'll likely defer that
> > until the net-2.6 fixes I just pushed to Linus are integrated.
> I've just completed this rebase.
> Andrew, I removed the troublesome IOAT patch.  The only conflicts
> and fixes you should need at this point are:
> 1) Removal of SET_MODULE_OWNER() from any extra drivers you import
>    into your tree.
> 2) dev_get_by_*() needs &init_net added as first parameter in any
>    other code you import outside of the net tree.

yup, I think I have all of those done now.

> I guess a lot of this could be avoided if I simply merge in whatever
> external stuff you're sucking in.

external stuff is mainly drivers.  These two:


plus boatloads of stuff in wireless.

>  I imagine this is just one of
> Linville's trees (I'm surprised that hasn't been sent to me frankly)
> and some specific new drivers you're merging in.

Yeah, git-net versus git-wireless isn't pretty.  The huge amount of pending
wireless stuff has been a bit of a nuisance for some months.  But it's
probably a bigger nuisance for John ;)

I don't know what remains to be done there, but it would be good to dig in
and get it all merged up.  Given the damage which net-2.6.24 does to
git-wireless, that might be tricky, dunno.

> I don't want to sound like a control freak or a whiner, but these
> merge conflicts are growing painful at an astronomic rate and I'd
> therefore prefer if we simply push everything through the net-2.6.24
> tree from now until the merge window.

Works for me.

> Today's rebase took several hours and it took significantly longer to
> suck in Jeff's netdev tree over the weekend.  I'm tired of playing
> patch monkey, so I can sympathize with how life must be every day
> for Andrew :-)

I'm finding that most problems are caused by maintainers committing stuff
to their git trees which affects code which other git-tree owners maintain.
Things like git-net playing with git-wireless code, git-block playing with
git-scsi-misc code, etc.

It would suit _me_ better if people were to try harder to merge changes via
the correct maintainer rather than going out-of-scope like this.  But it
would make life quite a lot harder for the people who are doing this
development, so it isn't clear where the line is best drawn.

>  But on a more serious note there are things I have
> to actually hack on myself so anything that decreases the amount of
> time I spend doing mindless patch whacking in the net-2.6.24 tree is
> appreciated.
> What say you?

My current aggregate diff against 2.6.23-rc6 is 28.8MB.  I'm just sitting
here with my head spinning ;)

(I actually got it all to build, boot and run ltp, which was rather
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists