linux-kernel - Re: Adding remoteproc/rpmsg to linux-next

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: <CAK=WgbYanX_q8JDO6MF3zLWMkRiJ6uynmu+s7eBNrX4qL0N8ug@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 23 Dec 2011 13:45:19 +0200
From:	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: Adding remoteproc/rpmsg to linux-next

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> Either way works for me, too. Right now, I would tend to let you send it
> to Linus directly because I haven't looked at the latest versions of the
> code for some time.

Directly to Linus it is then.

> While I generally trust you to do the right thing
> there, I'm not 100% comfortable to vouch for it in the way that an Ack
> or pull would imply without doing a more detailed review of the latest
> code.

Sure, I fully understand.

> I know that I promised you that review, but haven't gotten to it, sorry.
> I've done a 5 minute review now and it absolutely looks good to go in
> as far as I can tell, so I certainly don't object to you sending it
> to Linus for 3.3.

Thanks.

> If you think you need more Acks or if there are other
> reasons to have it go through arm-soc, please tell me and I'll try harder
> to find the time for a proper review.

I do have explicit Acks on the changes to other sub-systems, though
ideally I'd be happy to have some explicit Acks on the generic code
too.

But I hope this should be fine. Let's try to proceed this way and see
how it goes (maybe I should just tell Linus that despite the lack of
explicit Acks to some of the patches, people do think this is
good-to-go).

Thanks!
Ohad.
--
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/