linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] arch/microblaze fixes for 2.6.35-rc3 v2

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C0F7533.4070502@monstr.eu>
Date:	Wed, 09 Jun 2010 13:04:19 +0200
From:	Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] arch/microblaze fixes for 2.6.35-rc3 v2

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Seems like you will have written more angry emails than there will be
>> new commits in 2.6.35-rc3 ;-)
> 
> Well, partly in order to be fair. I did consider letting architectures 
> like microblaze just off the hook entirely - it's not like it will affect 
> a lot of people. But at the same time, I don't want to be in the situation 
> that some people get to send me patches just because I don't happen to 
> think that their changes will matter to most others.
> 
> And at this stage, I'd rather be too strict than too lenient. If -rc3 has 
> no new regressions, and fixes the ones that hit people worst, I'll be very 
> happy. I can be more open to patches after I get back, if it turns out 
> that I was _too_ strict for -rc3.
> 
> As to the number of "no, I won't take it" emails, I suspect a large part 
> of that is simply because most developers (understandably) do not read 
> lkml, stauing mostly on the development lists that are more specific to 
> their particular area. As a result, there's no real way to reliably reach 
> people, and I end up sending basically the same message several times.
> 
> Which obviously tends to also then make the messages more cross ;)

First of all let me apologize for this situation. There is no excuse
that I sent new features in requests after rc.

I've changed my workflow and I will send new pull request with the 
strict regression fixes only. There will be only two patches which I 
would like to add to your tree.

Thanks and sorry for hassle,
Michal


-- 
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian
--
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/