linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] target: Updates for v3.3-rc1 (round 1)

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: <1326225067.3264.51.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:51:07 -0600
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
Cc:	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	target-devel <target-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>,
	Jörn Engel <joern@...estorage.com>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] target: Updates for v3.3-rc1 (round 1)

On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 11:33 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 19:19 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > 2012/1/10 Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
> > > *) Initial merge for the SRP target (ib_srpt) fabric module (bart)
> > 
> > As far as I know the last time that patch was posted for review is
> > November 4 (http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi.target.devel/420).
> > The date of the ib_srpt commit is December 16
> > (http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/nab/target-pending.git;a=commitdiff;h=a42d985bd5b234da8b61347a78dc3057bf7bb94d).
> > The two patches aren't identical. That makes me wonder whether that
> > patch should have been reposted for review ?
> > 
> 
> Hi Bart,
> 
> The changes since the Nov 4 RFC are listed in the patch commit log:
> 
> ib_srpt: Make compilation with BUG=n proceed`
> ib_srpt: Use new target_core_fabric.h include
> ib_srpt: Check hex2bin() return code to silence build warning
> 
> These are all very minor and did not warrant another full RFC posting.

They might not warrant a full RFC reposting, but individually they
should have been posted to the list, so Bart is right.

As a maintainer, there shouldn't be a patch in your tree that hasn't
been over the mailing list once.  This is for three reasons

     1. Git is a great source control tool, bit it doesn't hugely
        facilitate review.  Even virtuoso git users find it easier to
        read and reply to emailed patches for this purpose
     2. Not everyone in our community is a wholesale git user.  For
        them, email might be the only way they get to see a patch, so
        using git alone lowers our pool of reviewers (and reviewers are
        the species we most need to encourage)
     3. Enforcing the rule that everything is emailed first can save you
        from the maintainers curse:  the temptation to bung in that last
        little "obvious" fix just before you send your tree to Linus
        which later turns out to cause huge regressions and much
        heartache.

You don't have to endlessly repost patch series, just make sure that
small updates get posted for review and comment before they get applied.

James


--
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/