linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: Ensure unique regulator debugfs directory names

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: <546AC8A4.4030705@roeck-us.net>
Date:	Mon, 17 Nov 2014 20:18:44 -0800
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Alan Tull <atull@...nsource.altera.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Ensure unique regulator debugfs directory
 names

On 11/17/2014 03:26 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:00:09PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 08:17:03AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
>>> To avoid the problem, prepend the debugfs directory name for a regulator
>>> with its parent device name if available, but only if no explicit
>>> regulator name was provided.
>
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> did you have time to look into this patch ?
>
> Please don't send contentless, quoted pings.  One of two things will be
> true: either your patch got lost in which case a quoted copy is of no
> use in getting the patch applied or the patch is buried under other mail
> in which case you are at best adding to the email volume and at worst
> your mail will never be seen as it's threaded in with the original send.
>

Hi Mark,

Sorry, I have no idea how you expect me (and others) to handle situations
like this, much less with this patch. Please keep in mind that this is
a per-maintainer process, and each maintainer handles things differently.
Individual maintainers may expect me to send a ping like I did, or to
resend the patch, or they may not reply because they dislike the patch
and they don't want to be bothered with a discussion. Some even go
ballistic if they get an e-mail with more than 80 columns of text.

Negotiating a minefield sometimes seems easier than submitting kernel
patches :-(.

I can't even find out by browsing the regulator mailing list since it
appears that there is no such list.

Guenter

--
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/