A Microsoft-Contributed Change To Linux 6.13 Is Causing A Last Minute Ruckus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • phoronix
    Administrator
    • Jan 2007
    • 67377

    A Microsoft-Contributed Change To Linux 6.13 Is Causing A Last Minute Ruckus

    Phoronix: A Microsoft-Contributed Change To Linux 6.13 Is Causing A Last Minute Ruckus

    A change to the Linux 6.13 kernel contributed by a Microsoft engineer ended up changing Linux x86_64 code without proper authorization and in turn causing troubles for users and now set to be disabled ahead of the Linux 6.13 stable release expected next Sunday...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
  • avis
    Senior Member
    • Dec 2022
    • 2264

    #2
    The title doesn't do this accident justice at all, in fact it looks like it was worded precisely to cause anger and uproar, and when you get to the gist of it, you realize that someone screwed up: "I just love how this went in without a single x86 maintainer Ack [acknowledgement], broke a bunch of things, and then is still there instead of being reverted".

    Maybe, just maybe, whoever applied the patch didn't do their due diligence, and there's no "evil" Microsoft intent behind this.

    Comment

    • EphemeralEft
      Senior Member
      • Dec 2022
      • 351

      #3
      Originally posted by avis View Post
      The title doesn't do this accident justice at all, in fact it looks like it was worded precisely to cause anger and uproar, and when you get to the gist of it, you realize that someone screwed up: "I just love how this went in without a single x86 maintainer Ack [acknowledgement], broke a bunch of things, and then is still there instead of being reverted".

      Maybe, just maybe, whoever applied the patch didn't do their due diligence, and there's no "evil" Microsoft intent behind this.
      FWIW, I didn’t interpret the title that way; I don’t think it implied any malice.

      Comment

      • Guiorgy
        Phoronix Member
        • Jul 2024
        • 52

        #4
        Originally posted by EphemeralEft View Post

        FWIW, I didn’t interpret the title that way; I don’t think it implied any malice.
        FWIW, I'm used to clickbait, so, though the title was provocative, I didn't take it to face value.

        Comment

        • avis
          Senior Member
          • Dec 2022
          • 2264

          #5
          Originally posted by EphemeralEft View Post

          FWIW, I didn’t interpret the title that way; I don’t think it implied any malice.
          Well, people actually see it that way, including me, and for other Linux reverts Michael has happily omitted the authorship but this time around it's the first words of the headline.

          Comment

          • woddy
            Senior Member
            • Feb 2023
            • 281

            #6
            Originally posted by avis View Post
            The title doesn't do this accident justice at all, in fact it looks like it was worded precisely to cause anger and uproar, and when you get to the gist of it, you realize that someone screwed up: "I just love how this went in without a single x86 maintainer Ack [acknowledgement], broke a bunch of things, and then is still there instead of being reverted".

            Maybe, just maybe, whoever applied the patch didn't do their due diligence, and there's no "evil" Microsoft intent behind this.
            Everyone can read what they want into a title, personally I didn't read any malice.
            However it seems that the dev. who made the patch didn't even follow the procedure.
            Can you make a mistake? YES, it happens to everyone....but the procedures are there to avoid problems like this.

            Comment

            • fotomar
              Phoronix Member
              • Jun 2024
              • 96

              #7
              Originally posted by avis View Post

              Maybe, just maybe…there's no "evil" Microsoft intent behind this.
              Microsoft is transparent about their efforts in support of “evil,” there’s no maybe about it.

              Comment

              • touma@volts.jp
                Junior Member
                • Oct 2024
                • 13

                #8
                You have to be careful... For example, test before sending a patch...?

                Comment

                • V1tol
                  Senior Member
                  • May 2016
                  • 608

                  #9
                  Microsoft engineers can't code. I don't understand why anyone is even surprised. Just look at Windows news where they break something each week.

                  Comment

                  • rabcor
                    Senior Member
                    • Apr 2013
                    • 1375

                    #10
                    Microsoft engineer posting malicious code to linux is no surprise. it not being reviewed and just put in without any fuss iss though.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X