linux-kernel - Re: wireless-drivers: random cleanup patches piling up

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:	Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:22:18 +0200
From:	Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:	Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@...il.com>
Cc:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
	kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: wireless-drivers: random cleanup patches piling up

Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@...il.com> writes:

> Hi Kalle,
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>> Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com> writes:
>>
>>> Sure, I am starting that way. I checked in patchwork and I do not see
>>> any checkpatch related patch pending (except staging, which Greg will
>>> handle). I think you must have cleared all of them.
>>
>> They are in deferred state. The search functionality in patchwork is not
>> that intuitive and they are not easy to find so here's a direct link:
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/?state=10&order=date
>
> I'm currently going through that list and producing a bundle of
> "applyable" patches.

Nice.

> My criteria is:
> 1. The change is sane.
> 2. It's either obviously correct, I can review it, or someone else has
> reviewed or acked it.
> 3. No changes other than rebasing and fixing commit messages are
> required to apply it.

BTW, 'git am -s -3' is the best way to apply a patch. The three way
merge is awesome (if the submitter has sent the patch correctly).

> Some of these patches need work on their commit messages, some are
> complicated enough that I feel I should be providing review notes so
> someone else can double check my review, and all of them should be
> rebased and compile tested. Also, some are controversial, so I'll be
> segregating them from the main set.
>
> How would you like me to communicate this list to you? I'm happy to
> provide branches you can pull from or I could just post updated
> versions to the list and give reviewed-by tags to those that don't
> need more work.
>
> Every patch will get an email on linux-wireless regardless.

I guess posting the patches to linux-wireless is the easiest for
everyone? I have a script which automatically takes patches from
patchwork so that's very easy for me. But remember to use Signed-off-by
instead of Reviewed-by as you are resending the patches.

Thanks you, your help here is very much appreciated.

-- 
Kalle Valo