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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 20 Jul 2014 10:36:31 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <>
To:	Fabian Frederick <>
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	LKML <>
Subject: Re: Patch priority in subjects ?

On Sun, 2014-07-20 at 19:13 +0200, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> I was reading all those "friendly" messages around checkpatch -f lately
> and the fact that code clean-up is too noisy (?)
> I guess I'm not the first to think about it but why don't we use something
> like a priority field in patch subject ?
> Of course it would be arbitrary but maybe better than nothing ?
> eg
> [PATCH 1/1 0] Urgent bug fix
> [PATCH 1/1 1] Bug fix
> [PATCH 1/1 2] ...
> [PATCH 1/1 7] kernel-doc fix
> [PATCH 1/1 8] Code clean-up
> [PATCH 1/1 9] Trivial fix
> Maybe this could help some people to sort/filter/delete
> It's just an idea of course...

It's a good idea, but this is more a subject for
discussion on and by the list than off-list so I'm
adding LKML.

As far as I know, the only infrequently used prefixes
today are "RFC" and "trivial".

If you start to use a prefix, please use readable
text and not some numeric table index.



Getting people to use
	git format-patch --subject-prefix="text"
will be the useful part of this challenge.

Maybe you could develop YA little helper script for
that, ideally with versioning support for repeated
patch submissions too.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists