linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 00/11]Get rid of all the old macro DMA_nBIT_MASK and use DMA_BIT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <499D54F6.7000108@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:47:50 +0100
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	Yang Hongyang <yanghy@...fujitsu.com>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@...glemail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 00/11]Get rid of all the old macro DMA_nBIT_MASK and
 use DMA_BIT_MASK(n) instead

Yang Hongyang wrote:
> v1->v2:fix s/micro/macro typo and keep the old defines
>             of DMA_nBIT_MASK
> ----------------------
> Replace all DMA_nBIT_MASK macro with the new DMA_BIT_MASK(n) macro
> 
> 01:Replace all DMA_64BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(64)
> 02:Replace all DMA_48BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(48)
> 03:Replace all DMA_40BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(40)
> 04:Replace all DMA_39BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(39)
> 05:Replace all DMA_35BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(35)
> 06:Replace all DMA_32BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(32)
> 07:Replace all DMA_31BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(31)
> 08:Replace all DMA_30BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(30)
> 09:Replace all DMA_28BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(28)
> 10:Replace all DMA_24BIT_MASK macro with DMA_BIT_MASK(24)
> 11:Update the old macro DMA_nBIT_MASK related documentations
> 

Shouldn't you organize the patch series per subsystem, not per old
macro?  And then Cc the respective maintainers?

As it stands, the patches cannot be routed through the normal channels;
yet there is no fundamental reason to handle these patches differently
from normal patches.
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= --=- =--==
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/