linux-kernel - Re: iio/accel/stk8ba50: Use common error handling code in stk8ba50

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:   Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:09:09 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        Tiberiu Breana <tiberiu.a.breana@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: iio/accel/stk8ba50: Use common error handling code in
 stk8ba50_probe()

> Again, a general kernel development rule is to float only one
> patch of a given type until you have had feedback on it.

Some update suggestions according also to this general source code
transformation pattern were already integrated in other software areas.


> These backwards goto cases are sufficiently different from your earlier
> patch that got reviews that,

They are required if you would ever like to support software refactorings
in directions which I propose occasionally.


> at most, you should have sent one to the list and then given time
> for it to be properly reviewed (up to a week on IIO list typically).

Did I present my ideas a bit too quick in this case?

Regards,
Markus