linux-kernel - Re: ACPI-video: Fine-tuning for several function implementations

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:   Tue, 6 Sep 2016 16:10:22 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: ACPI-video: Fine-tuning for several function implementations

> Anyway, if there's something I don't like in particular, I'll let you know.

Thanks for your general interest.

I hope that occasional disagreements can be resolved in constructive ways.

> However, it's a pain to review 20 patches if you could review 4 instead.

Are there any more possibilities to improve the convenience for this
change review process with advanced tools?

> Please take the reviewers' time into consideration too.

I am trying this to some degree.

But I guess that it is hard to do something about corresponding efforts
when various contributors can easily spot many software update opportunities
in the discussed source files, isn't it?

Regards,
Markus