netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 00/44] treewide: Remove I/O port accessors for HAS

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: <7b5c40f3-d25b-4082-807d-4d75dc38886d@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 13:29:39 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Niklas Schnelle" <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
 "Richard Cochran" <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc: "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 "Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
 "Mauro Carvalho Chehab" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
 "Alan Stern" <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
 "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
 "Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
 "Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
 "Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@...belt.com>, "Albert Ou" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
 linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/44] treewide: Remove I/O port accessors for HAS_IOPORT=n

On Mon, May 22, 2023, at 12:50, Niklas Schnelle wrote:

> A few patches have already been applied but I've kept those which are not yet
> in v6.4-rc3.
>
> This version is based on v6.4-rc3 and is also available on my kernel.org tree
> in the has_ioport_v5:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/niks/linux.git

I think it would be best if as many patches as possible get merged
into v6.5 through the individidual subsystems, though I can take
whatever is left through the asm-generic tree.

Since the goal is to have maintainers pick up part of this, I would
recommend splitting the series per subsystem, having either a
separate patch or a small series for each maintainer that should
pick them up.

More importantly, I think you should rebase the series against
linux-next in order to find and drop the patches that are queued
up for 6.5 already. The patches will be applied into branches
that are based on 6.4-rc of course, but basing on linux-next
is usually the easiest when targeting multiple maintainer
trees.

Maybe let's give it another week to have more maintainers pick
up stuff from v5, and then send out a v6 as separate submissions.

    Arnd