linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] regulator: palmas: Drop unnecessary static

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:   Mon, 15 May 2017 11:54:50 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, keescook@...omium.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] regulator: palmas: Drop unnecessary static

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 06:41:41PM +0800, Julia Lawall wrote:

> mailing lists.  If the patches are sent separately, then could there be a
> cover letter for each one?  If the semantic patch is complicated, then I
> typically put the whole thing there, and an abbreviated one in the actual
> patch.  That is not relevant here, because the semantic patch is small.

Well, if the cover letter is needed to understand the patch then it
needs to go to everyone anyway...

> Part of the purpose of the cover letter was to allow people who were not
> interested to skip over the whole thing at once.

On the flip side things that lack context can get discarded easily.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)