linux-kernel - Re: [v2] can: Use common error handling code in vxcan

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:   Thu, 2 Nov 2017 09:22:08 +0100
From:   Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v2] can: Use common error handling code in vxcan_newlink()

On 11/01/2017 08:37 PM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> These addresses were suggested (or recommended?) by the script “get_maintainer.pl”.

I know.

(..)

> How does this view fit to the information in the section “5) Select
> the recipients for your patch” from the document “submitting-patches.rst”?

We discussed and agreed about your patch. It is clear and simple and has 
no side effects to any other driver nor other subsystems.

It was just about getting *this* patch into upstream where the Linux CAN 
ML is the right place to post - that was my suggestion. So there was no 
need to take the *standard* get_maintainer mail pump-gun again for this 
patch in order to save bandwidth, energy and peoples lifetime :-)

Regards,
Oliver