Re: WTF: patch "[PATCH] random: allow architectures to optionally define" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 3.11-stable tree?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 05:12:09PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 01:16:41PM -0700, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 3.11-stable tree.
> > 
> > I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at
> > Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt.
> 
> This patch adds a new interface which allows architecture-specific
> code to address a security issue with the random driver for those
> platforms which define get_cycles() to return zero all the time.  The
> most important p[latform for this is MIPS, since there are a lot of
> home routers which use MIPS, but the full list is:

But, what code is using that interface?  Adding new features and
interfaces is not for stable kernel releases, is it?

If no one is using this new interface, why add it?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]