linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv1 000/211] unicore32 architecture support

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: <4D00E74B.3030401@kernel.org>
Date:	Thu, 09 Dec 2010 15:27:23 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:	Guan Xuetao <guanxuetao@...c.pku.edu.cn>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv1 000/211] unicore32 architecture support

On 12/09/2010 03:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> It's not a question of merging. It's a question of reviewing and I've
> done quite a bunch of reviews on new archs, so I know what I'm talking
> about. Reviewing a single patch with everything and the world included
> is just not workable.

Sure, I agree the per-topic patch series would be much better for
reviewing.  Then, just make _that_ point.  Don't go to the opposite
extreme and claim unthreaded per-file 200+ patches in whatever order
are better as that's painful for everyone on the mailing list.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/