linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 20/33] net: Convert to devm_ioremap

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: <20130122065629.GA14523@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de>
Date:	Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:56:29 +0100
From:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, arnd@...db.de, w.sang@...gutronix.de,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/33] net: Convert to devm_ioremap_resource()

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 03:29:13PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:09:13 +0100
> 
> > Convert all uses of devm_request_and_ioremap() to the newly introduced
> > devm_ioremap_resource() which provides more consistent error handling.
> > 
> > devm_ioremap_resource() provides its own error messages so all explicit
> > error messages can be removed from the failure code paths.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
> 
> This won't compile if I apply it.
> 
> You really have to be clear when you submit patches like this.
> 
> Since you only CC:'d the networking developers for this one
> patch, there is _ZERO_ context for us to work with to understand
> what's going on.
> 
> You have to also CC: us on the other relevant changes and your
> "[PATCH 00/33]" posting that explains what is happening.

I planned to do so initially, but that yielded a Cc list of 156 people
and mailing lists, which I thought wasn't going to go down so well
either. In general I like Cc'ing everyone concerned on all patches of
the series, specifically for reasons of context. Some people have been
annoyed when I did so. Still, for small series where only a few dozen
people are concerned that seems to me to be the best way. But 156 email
addresses is a different story.

Either you add to many people or you don't add enough. Where do we draw
the line?

Thierry

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped