linux-kernel - RE: [lustre-devel] [PATCH v2 0/6] staging: lustre: update modinfo data

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, 26 Feb 2016 15:46:02 +0000
From:	"Simmons, James A." <simmonsja@...l.gov>
To:	'Greg Kroah-Hartman' <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
CC:	"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: RE: [lustre-devel] [PATCH v2 0/6] staging: lustre: update modinfo
	data

>On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 06:11:07AM +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
>> 
>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 1:03 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> 
>> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:07:06PM -0500, James Simmons wrote:
>> >> The module information for Lustre is stale or in some cases
>> >> completely missing. This collection of patches brings the
>> >> modinfo up to date as well as filling in any missing information.
>> >> This patch set has been redone to rebase it on Oleg's latest
>> >> patch set to avoid collisons in merging.
>> >> 
>> >> Andreas Dilger (4):
>> >>  staging: lustre: add missing MODULE_AUTHOR for LNet selftest module
>> >>  staging: lustre: update the MODULE_DESCRIPTION for all lustre modules
>> >>  staging: lustre: make module_init/exit naming consistent
>> >>  staging: lustre: update comment for lnet_lib_init/exit
>> >> 
>> >> James Simmons (2):
>> >>  staging: lustre: move module info to end of libcfs module.c file
>> >>  staging: lustre: update the MODULE_VERSION for all lustre modules
>> > 
>> > What changed to need a v2 of this series?
>> > 
>> > Please ALWAYS say what the difference is, don't expect us to "just
>> > know".
>> > 
>> > Please send a v3 of this, describing the changes, in the correct format,
>> > in each patch.  You know better than this…
>> 
>> I think it says above that the rebase was done on top of my patchset
>> to resolve the conflict that arose?
>
>Where?  Ugh, yeah, kind of, but where is the big v2: marking or some
>such thing like is required?  It's very easy to miss this (as I did.)
>Please make it easy for maintainers, not hard on them...

Sorry, in the future I will add a ChangeLog section for newer versions of patches.
The good news is the patches from Oleg's that conflicted landed already which
means the this patch set is ready to land.