On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 02:49:25PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Sasha Levin Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com writes:
Hey Eric,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:20:21AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Sasha Levin Alexander.Levin@microsoft.com writes:
What is the justification for backporting this and the other similar Documentation commits?
It was flagged as a bug fixing patch by a new process we're testing, and when I looked at it I thought that the commit message suggests it fixes an ABI issue.
Unfortunately they just reveal an ABI issue. I believe there are some fixes coming but given that the issues are a decade old in many cases actually fixing these things must be approach with care so as not to create regressions.
I've removed these commits.
These commits just introduce a define _FIXME with value of 0, to document that the userspace ABI was handled incorrectly long ago.
These commits do not fix anything. Thes commits do not change anything except a little how they are handled in siginfo_layout. And I don't see the changes that introduce siginfo_layout in kernel/signal.c being backported.
Further these commits don't even have a fixes tag so I am curious what is triggering them for backport.
We're testing out a new mechanism where we train a neural network to detect bug fixing patches and flag them for manual review. We're working on a FAQ + more detailed information right now.
The neural network did seem to pick up on something that is worth looking at.
Indeed, and we use review input to retrain the NN on these commits. Thank you!