From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755551Ab1GFB2M (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2011 21:28:12 -0400 Received: from smtp.outflux.net ([198.145.64.163]:58008 "EHLO smtp.outflux.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752461Ab1GFB2M (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2011 21:28:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 18:27:39 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown , Pavel Machek , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: give names to realmode wakeup flags Message-ID: <20110706012739.GA32221@outflux.net> References: <1309818953-769-1-git-send-email-kees.cook@canonical.com> <1309818953-769-2-git-send-email-kees.cook@canonical.com> <4E1392BA.8010708@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E1392BA.8010708@zytor.com> Organization: Canonical X-HELO: www.outflux.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 03:39:54PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 07/04/2011 03:35 PM, Kees Cook wrote: > > Instead of using literals, use a common set of names for the > > user-controlled realmode wakeup flags. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > > I'm sorry, but I really have to complain about this: > > This was a very unfriendly thing to do. Obviously I wasn't trying to be unfriendly. :P > You took a patch that is a bug fix to be considered for -stable, > and you applied it *on top of a cleanup patch*. It wasn't clear to me if the MISC_ENABLE reload should be considered for stable (it does technically "more" than my original patch, and changes the resume header structure, etc). If it should be forwarded to -stable, that's fine too. I just didn't want to presume. > They should not have been part of the same patchset, > but *certainly* not in that order. Since they hit the same .h file in the same location, I wasn't sure what order to do it in. It seemed unhelpful to send them separately. > Please resubmit. Sure thing -- in the opposite order, or totally separate from each other? -Kees -- Kees Cook Ubuntu Security Team