linux-kernel - Re: [patch] x86, voyager: fix ioremap

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: <20080427203127.3c7d0e58@bree.surriel.com>
Date:	Sun, 27 Apr 2008 20:31:27 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [patch] x86, voyager: fix ioremap_nocache()

On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 16:31:06 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> You can post whatever patches you like a million times to lkml.
> That's not the problem.
> 
> It's that the patches don't get reviewed, posting them more or to a
> different place doesn't help that.

If you really want to enforce this, I bet it could be automated
with scripts around git.

Simply refuse to apply a patch that does not have at least two
Signed-off-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by lines and refuse to apply
a "git pull" if there is a changeset like that in the tree.

Of course, this could end up screwing rare architectures like
Voyager, so I'm not convinced it is a good idea...

-- 
All rights reversed.
--
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/