netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 -stable] Re: rib_trie / Fix inflate_threshold

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]

Date:	Wed, 8 Jul 2009 08:44:48 +0200
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	pstaszewski@...are.pl, netdev@...r.kernel.org, robert@...ur.slu.se,
	jorge@...2.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 -stable] Re: rib_trie / Fix inflate_threshold_root.
	Now=15 size=11 bits

On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 07:42:08PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
> Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 15:08:28 +0200
> 
> > This new patch below is intended only for -stable (and later for
> > net-next), because it doesn't meet rules of the current -rc. Anyway,
> > it's not critical (but it actually fixes a regression from 2.6.22).
> 
> I think if we' re going to toss this into -stable, we should
> put it into net-2.6 too, and that's what I'm going to do.

It's your decision: I don't think this patch is worth any arguing
about (de)stabilizing. Btw., since -stable rules are less strict it
seems natural such patches with bug fixes should rather go net-next
-> -stable way, unless I miss something?

Thanks,
Jarek P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html