linux-kernel - Re: [patch V4] lib: GCD: Use binary GCD algorithm instead of Euclidean

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: <20160507204159.24714.qmail@ns.horizon.com>
Date:	7 May 2016 16:41:59 -0400
From:	"George Spelvin" <linux@...izon.com>
To:	schwab@...ux-m68k.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux@...izon.com
Subject: Re: [patch V4] lib: GCD: Use binary GCD algorithm instead of Euclidean

> Take a look at the Cc: list.

Yes, I realized how long it was about half a second after hitting "send".

Although I didn't really think it through at the time, even now that I
do it's not entirely clear who should have been trimmed, either.

In general lkml tradition is to not drop people from the Cc: list unless
you're really sure they're not interested, and my suggestion to rename the
CONFIG_ option is something that really wants multiple people's opinions.

Do you think it's borderline (and I'll think harder in future), or
am I misjudging and I was *clearly* over the line?