linux-kernel - Re: Adjustments for a lot of function implementations

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:   Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:41:25 +0100
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Muralidharan Karicheri <mkaricheri@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Adjustments for a lot of function implementations

> Yes, and you were told not to do it

I have got an other impression.

> like that again.

I continued with the presentation of suggestions from my selection
of change possibilities.
It seems that there are very different expectations for the
preferred patch granularity.

Can it happen again that you are going to use a development tool
like “quilt” (as a maintainer) for the desired recombination
of possible update steps?

Regards,
Markus