linux-kernel - Re: iio/…: Use common error handling code

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: <e7292cc3-e4e2-0943-7cf9-4852cf37ef36@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Sun, 10 Dec 2017 13:33:01 +0100
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>
Subject: Re: iio/…: Use common error handling code

> Again, a general kernel development rule is to float only one
> patch of a given type until you have had feedback on it.

A few weeks later …


> As I said in one of the other patches, I always reply to all
> patches I am rejecting so that anyone coming across them later
> on their own from an archive or similar can immediately see the
> reasons why they are a bad idea without having to know the mailing
> list context.

Can you get into the mood to clarify any remaining change possibilities
a bit more?

Regards,
Markus