linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 tip/core/locking 0/4] Memory-barrier documentation updates

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: <20131205181834.GV15492@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:18:34 -0800
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...nel.org, henrik@...tad.us,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
	niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com, sbw@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 tip/core/locking 0/4] Memory-barrier documentation
 updates

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 01:05:24PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 08:51:46 -0500
> 
> > I wish vger wouldn't do that. I wonder how much spam is really flagged
> > by this one characteristic alone. That is, spam that would have made it
> > otherwise, but because of the Cc list, it was rejected.
> 
> 10 to 20 spam posts per day are prevented by this rule.
> 
> And frankly it's totally rediculous to have such a huge CC: list
> in the first place, even if the vger spam filter didn't exist.
> 
> If you CC: something to netdev, it's going to reach me, you don't need
> to CC: me.  If just makes for a dup that I have to delete in my inbox,
> so you're actually making more work for me in the end.
> 
> That's just one example.

Hello, David,

The situation that leads me to use a large CC list is when I am doing
something that affects all architectures.  I could imagine keeping a
smallish CC list, then forwarding or bouncing the email to the remaining
maintainers  Would that work reasonably, or is there some better approach?

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/