| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 22:57:18 +0800 From: Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com> To: Jimmy Thrasibule <thrasibule.jimmy@...il.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: What is the right practice to get new code upstream( was Fwd: [patch] a simple hardware detector for latency as well as throughput ver. 0.1.0) On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Jimmy Thrasibule <thrasibule.jimmy@...il.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 20:57 +0800, Luming Yu wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I must have forgotten cc key persons. Sorry to make noise again. >> I need to know what the right practice is to get your attention to >> accept a new tool upstream like this one. > Might good to have a look at the following: > > http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmitChecklist > http://www.linuxfoundation.org/content/how-participate-linux-community Thanks for these pointers, they are useful. My intention is to push the initial working version into -mm.Then continuously improve bits by bits. The first version works at minimal level as a tool. So I requested it merges into linux-next or -mm. as the first step to find way upstream. Any advise on this? > > Regards, > Jimmy > -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists