linux-kernel - 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)

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: <20120613152045.81ab66d9.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:20:45 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	sfr@...b.auug.org.au, jcm@...masters.org,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.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, 12 Jun 2012 20:57:02 +0800
Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com> wrote:

> I need to know what the right practice is to get your attention to
> accept a new tool upstream like this one.

Seems that you have some good feedback from Arnd to be looking at.  I'm
usually the guy for mysterious misc stuff such as this, so please cc me
on future revisions.

The name "hw_test" and "HW_TEST" is too vague.  The topic "testing
hardware" is very broad, and this module only touches a small fraction
of it, so please think up a far more specific name.

--
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/