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  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:   Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:49:11 -0500
From:   Sasha Levin <>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <>
Cc:     Mike Christie <>,,,
        Jason Wang <>,
        "Michael S . Tsirkin" <>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.9 22/33] vhost scsi: add lun parser helper

On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 09:27:28AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>On 01/12/20 00:59, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>It's quite easy to NAK a patch too, just reply saying "no" and it'll be
>>dropped (just like this patch was dropped right after your first reply)
>>so the burden on maintainers is minimal.
>The maintainers are _already_ marking patches with "Cc: stable".  That 

They're not, though. Some forget, some subsystems don't mark anything,
some don't mark it as it's not stable material when it lands in their
tree but then it turns out to be one if it sits there for too long.

>(plus backports) is where the burden on maintainers should start and 
>end.  I don't see the need to second guess them.

This is similar to describing our CI infrastructure as "second
guessing": why are we second guessing authors and maintainers who are
obviously doing the right thing by testing their patches and reporting
issues to them?

Are you saying that you have always gotten stable tags right? never
missed a stable tag where one should go?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists