netdev - Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal

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]

Message-ID: <CAKfmpSdD2bupC=N8LnK_Uq7wtv+Ms6=e1kk-veeD24EVkMH7wA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 23:04:16 -0400
From:   Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 8:26 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>
> Hi Jarod
>
> Do you have this change scripted? Could you apply the script to v5.4
> and then cherry-pick the 8 bonding fixes that exist in v5.4.51. How
> many result in conflicts?
>
> Could you do the same with v4.19...v4.19.132, which has 20 fixes.
>
> This will give us an idea of the maintenance overhead such a change is
> going to cause, and how good git is at figuring out this sort of
> thing.

Okay, I have some fugly bash scripts that use sed to do the majority
of the work here, save some manual bits done to add duplicate
interfaces w/new names and some aliases, and everything is compiling
and functions in a basic smoke test here.

Summary on the 5.4 git cherry-pick conflict resolution after applying
changes: not that good. 7 of the 8 bonding fixes in the 5.4 stable
branch required fixing when straight cherry-picking. Dumping the
patches, running a sed script over them, and then git am'ing them
works pretty well though. I didn't try 4.19 (yet?), I assume it'll
just be more of the same.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@...hat.com