linux-kernel - Re: drm/rcar-du: Use common error handling code in rcar_du_encoders

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: <fb1a946b-99ea-89a7-8fad-6c15e1934ce4@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:03:45 +0100
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: drm/rcar-du: Use common error handling code in
 rcar_du_encoders_init()

> In general, I'll pick up any patches that are good,

This is usual.


> but the current track record is that Markus' patches need extra scrutiny,

I find that this can be fine according to a safe review for presented
update suggestions.


> and many of the patches contain subjective changes that lead to debate

Some discussion is occasionally needed to achieve the desired change acceptance,
isn't it?


> that is not constructive.

I got an other opinion here.


> There's no return on investment here.

I hope that the view can become more positive.
How will the clarification evolve further?

Regards,
Markus