linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] power supply changes for 4.2

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 2015 06:48:28 +0200
From:	Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] power supply changes for 4.2

Hi,

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 04:13:34PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...g0.de> wrote:
> >
> >   git://git.infradead.org/battery-2.6.git tags/for-4.2
> 
> So I started wondering. Why do you use infradead for one of your
> trees, but git.kernel.org for the other (the HSI one)?
>
> That just looks odd to me.

Since I simply took over the existing repository for the power
supply subsystem (commit ad8464a2f31a54560b17d5fc6b1cca5fa68de83d).
This was not possible for the HSI subsystem, so I used
git.kernel.org infrastructure.

> Also, something in your HSI pull request made gmail unhappy, and
> it marked it as spam. Do you send the emails differently too?

No, both mails were sent in the same way.

-- Sebastian

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)