linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] Adding empia base driver

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 8 Nov 2008 11:46:08 +0100
From:	"Markus Rechberger" <mrechberger@...il.com>
To:	"Mauro Carvalho Chehab" <mchehab@...radead.org>
Cc:	"Andre Kelmanson" <akelmanson@...il.com>,
	"Hans Verkuil" <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	em28xx <em28xx@...ntral.de>, acano@...tmail.fm,
	"Bouwsma Barry" <freebeer.bouwsma@...il.com>,
	"Dan Kreiser" <kreiser@...ormatik.hu-berlin.de>,
	"Frank Neuber" <fn@...nelport.de>,
	"Jelle de Jong" <jelledejong@...ercraft.nl>,
	"John Stowers" <john.stowers.lists@...il.com>,
	"Lukas Kuna" <lukas.kuna@...anet.net>,
	"Stefan Vonolfen" <stefan.vonolfen@...il.com>,
	"Stephan Berberig" <s.berberig@...or.de>,
	"Thomas Giesecke" <thomas.giesecke@...mbh-naumburg.de>,
	"Vitaly Wool" <vwool@...mvista.com>,
	"Zhenyu Wang" <zhen78@...il.com>,
	v4l <video4linux-list@...hat.com>, linux-dvb@...uxtv.org,
	greg@...ah.com, "Alan Cox" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Adding empia base driver

On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Markus Rechberger
<mrechberger@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
> <mchehab@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, Markus Rechberger wrote:
>>
>>> As written earlier already I don't think that I didn't follow any
>>> rules here since I provided single
>>> patches at the very first beginning
>>>
>>> http://mcentral.de/v4l-dvb/
>>> (this is all kernel code and only kernel code).
>>>
>>> That work didn't get attention and due a different decision of
>>> framework changes (which that codebase relied
>>> on) it all had to be rebased, I doubt that anyone
>>> would have reworked all that patch for patch. Instead it went into one
>>> repository and finally got modified to work again
>>> with the available framework rather than relying onto any such
>>> modifications.
>>
>> One thing is to rebase a tree, another is to merge all patches into a big
>> one, not preserving the original authorships.
>>
>> Development trees sometimes need rebase. This is done by popping all newer
>> patches from the tree, applying the upstream patches, and then pushing again
>> every individual patches, fixing the ones that don't apply well, but
>> preserving their authorships.
>>
>> The modified patches should receive a special tag before the maintainer's
>> SOB, like:
>>
>> [me@...ail: I did this to apply this patch]
>>
>> as stated at the kernel docs.
>>
>> This method will reduce a lot the risk of breaking improvements and other
>> fixes that happened upstream, and will properly preserve authorship of
>> individual patches.
>>
>> If you were doing a rebase, your patches would likely be accepted.
>>
>

let's link back to the only review done:
 http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2008-11/msg00060.html

<snip>
In my opinion it's pretty much hopeless trying to convert the current
em28xx driver into what you have. It's a huge amount of work that no
one wants to do and (in this case) with very little benefit.
</snip>

Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/