linux-kernel - Re: [patch] pci: pci_enable_device

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]

Message-Id: <20080204051230.70d5b735.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 4 Feb 2008 05:12:30 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	pcihpd-discuss@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] pci: pci_enable_device_bars() fix

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 13:57:36 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
> 
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> so please tell me Jeff. If Greg, who is the super-maintainer of your 
> >> code area, and who deals with your code every day and changes it 
> >> every minute and hour, simply did not Cc: the SCSI list - how am i, a 
> >> largely outside party in this matter, supposed to notice that 3 
> >> maintainers and 3 mailing lists in the Cc: were somehow not enough 
> >> and that i was supposed to grow the already sizable Cc: list even 
> >> more?
> >
> > Because, regardless of the situation, it's both common courtesy and 
> > wise practice to CC relevant driver maintainers, when you touch a 
> > driver.
> >
> > And it's just common sense: Greg simply does not know the intimate 
> > details of every PCI driver.  Nor do I.  Nor you.
> >
> > In the case of lpfc here, we have an active driver maintainer, and an 
> > up-to-date MAINTAINERS entry.  Even if you are too slack to read 
> > MAINTAINERS, 'git log' would have given you the same info.
> >
> > Don't pretend there is some benefit here to ignoring the people that 
> > best know the driver.  I don't buy that; it simply makes no 
> > engineering sense whatsoever.
> 
> what you _STILL_ do not realize is the following: you still attribute 
> the lack of Cc:s to some intention of mine. No, it was not my intention. 
> At first glance the Cc: looked large and complete enough in an 
> _existing_ discussion and that's was the end of my (brief) attention 
> regarding the Cc: line. Yes, it would have been a bit better had i 
> noticed the lack of Cc:s in an existing discussion, but i didnt.

Actually I (and probably others) generally avoid cc'ing mailing lists on
patch traffic.  I spew out enough script-generated traffic as it is.

> ...
>   mailing list aliases to get the 'guaranteed attention' of maintainers 
>

whoa.  You must know better mailing lists than I do ;)

--
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/