linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] edac.h: Add generic layers for describing a memory location

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: <20120424104606.GB11559@aftab.osrc.amd.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:46:06 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
To:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>
Cc:	Linux Edac Mailing List <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Doug Thompson <norsk5@...oo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] edac.h: Add generic layers for describing a memory
 location

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 08:07:13PM +0000, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> There are 55 patches affected by this change. Applying them locally
> was as simple as running this small script to the submitted patches:
> 
> $ for i in `quilt series`; do sed s,is_csrow,is_virt_csrow,g $i|sed s,GET_POS,EDAC_DIMM_PTR,g| >a && mv a $i; done
> 
> However, mailbombing 55 patches just because of the above rename
> is probably not very welcome by the people at the ML. Also, at least
> for me, it seems more logical to add a patch like that at the end of
> the patch series, than to force people to re-analyze the entire patchset.
> 
> Due to that, I won't resend the entire patchbomb to the ML.

This is exactly one of the reasons why one shouldn't send mailbombs like
that in the first place.

Documentation/SubmittingPatches does not state this for no reason:

"If you cannot condense your patch set into a smaller set of patches,
then only post say 15 or so at a time and wait for review and
integration."

And having patches which change earlier patches in your patchset is
absolutely a no-no.

This means at least that your previous patches haven't been reviewed
properly and still suffer some churn, causing the later ones to need
readjustment.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
--
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/