linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property

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: <20180214104235.GA9804@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:42:35 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Harald Geyer <harald@...ib.org>
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is
 required property

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:00:12AM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote:
> Mark Brown writes:

> > No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something
> > to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?".

> Well, I did quote the entire patch and gave a summary of the status
> as far as I know it. So I really don't understand why I got the
> "no content free pings" response ...

Which just boils down to a "what's going on with this" message.

> > As I said in my
> > reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to
> > resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case
> > it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried
> > somehow.

> So you are saying you don't want pings as followups to patches at all, if
> the patch is old enough that it probably got lost?

> I guess that would make sense too, but again it's not obvious to read
> the canned response that way.

No, I'm saying don't send pings at all.  Resend patches if you think
they've got lost, and as normal when you're sending a patch it should
start off a new thread.  The goal is to send something that can be
directly acted on when it's seen rather than requring another round of
mails.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)