linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Support for generalized use of make C={1,2} via a wrapper program

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1513444305.31439.37.camel@oracle.com>
Date:   Sat, 16 Dec 2017 18:11:45 +0100
From:   Knut Omang <knut.omang@...cle.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
        rds-devel@....oracle.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Support for generalized use of make C={1,2} via
 a wrapper program

On Sat, 2017-12-16 at 09:00 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-12-16 at 17:27 +0100, Knut Omang wrote:
> > On Sat, 2017-12-16 at 07:21 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2017-12-16 at 15:42 +0100, Knut Omang wrote:
> > > > This patch series implements features to make it easier to run checkers on the
> > > > entire kernel as part of automatic and developer testing.
> > > 
> > > This seems like a useful and reasonable series, thanks.
> > 
> > thanks, appreciated,
> > 
> > > Do please take Julia's grammar updates.
> > 
> > will do,
> > 
> > > How is this series to be applied?
> > 
> > I am open for suggestions.
> > 
> > Let's leave patch #3 out for now.
> > 
> > It's safe to apply #1 (and #2) alone.
> 
> I'd just as soon combine patch #1 and an updated 
> patch #2 into a single patch and get that applied
> sooner than later.

Ok, will do that.

> > They don't break anything by getting into the RDMA or RDS subsystem 
> > without patch #1, alternatively they can go together with the set of cleanup patches I
> > have prepared for each of RDMA and RDS after #1 is in.
> 
> right.

Thanks,
Knut