linux-kernel - Re: regulator: da9062: undefined Kconfig option MFD

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]

Date:	Fri, 22 May 2015 14:07:59 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>
Cc:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>, stwiss.opensource@...semi.com,
	lgirdwood@...il.com, support.opensource@...semi.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andreas Ruprecht <andreas.ruprecht@....de>,
	hengelein Stefan <stefan.hengelein@....de>
Subject: Re: regulator: da9062: undefined Kconfig option MFD_DA9062

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:53:16PM +0200, Valentin Rothberg wrote:

> > One effect of being too keen to report things is that a high false
> > positive rate will cause people to pay less attention, if the source is
> > usually just generating noise then it gets tuned out.

> Note, that we keep a list of all reported items.  If we know (for
> certain) that something will be applied, we won't report anything
> similar for a longer period of time.

> I don't want those reports to be seen as spam, so I guess we need to
> find a less noisy approach.  It's something I do as a hobby besides my
> PhD, so the only intention is to help, not to annoy people.

I'd expect that holding off on the initial report for a while (at least
a week but I'd guess longer) would probably avoid a lot of noise.  Doing
it immediately is likely to generate lots of false positives simply
because coordinating down to a single day is a lot of effort.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)