linux-kernel - Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in three functions

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: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711280844180.2450@hadrien>
Date:   Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:49:13 +0100 (CET)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        "Andrew F. Davis" <afd@...com>,
        Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@...il.com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: omapfb/dss: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation
 in three functions



On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> It seems that I got no responses so far for clarification requests
> >> according to the documentation in a direction I hoped for.
> >
> > That's because you are pretty unresponsive to direction.
>
> From which places did you get this impression?

Perhaps from the text that you have written only four lines below.  All
comments are dismissed as "the usual mixture of disagreements and
acceptance".  If you look at the patches sent by others, who learn from
the feedback provided to them, there are not so many responses on the
disagreements side.  So the mixture is not usual.  Since you send lots of
patches on the same issues, there should be no disagreements at all at
this point.

julia

>
> > You've gotten _many_ replies to your patches
>
> I got the usual mixture of disagreements and acceptance for
> my selection of change possibilities.
> Some constructive feedback was also provided which might need
> further software development considerations.
> Is the situation improvable here?
>
>
> > to which you have seemingly decided to ignore.
>
> You might eventually notice that I react to special information
> occasionally with a big delay.
>
> For which concrete details are you still waiting for a better
> response from me?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>