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:   Wed, 26 Jul 2017 23:39:43 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Egil Hjelmeland <privat@...l-hjelmeland.no>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com, corbet@....net,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 01/10] net: dsa: lan9303: Fixed MDIO interface

> Good. Just one question about process. Could I have posted my work
> as a RFC? To get one round of initial feedback before chopping into
> small patch requests. As well as indicating where I am heading. Or is
> that just waste of human bandwidth?

Depends. Post 100 RFC patches, i won't look at them. Post 21 with a
cover note making it clear you are planning to submit them in blocks
of 7, i might.

But it is best to assume reviewers have small blocks of time. 21
patches take 3 times a long to review as 7. The block of time might
not be enough for 21, so the review gets differed. 7 are more likely
to fit in the available time, so it happens quickly.

   Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ