linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] for-linux/sndif: add explicit back and front synchronization

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: <43348cf5-d2f8-9d7d-0390-2273eef8f67d@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Apr 2018 12:55:16 -0400
From:   Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To:     Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@...il.com>,
        konrad.wilk@...cle.com, tiwai@...e.de
Cc:     xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, jgross@...e.com,
        "Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@...m.com" <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@...m.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] for-linux/sndif: add explicit back and front
 synchronization

On 04/12/2018 12:11 PM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
> Hello, Konrad, Takashi!
>
> Could you please review the *Linux Kernel* version of the changes?
> As I said in the cover letter below there is no functional changes
> comparing to the corresponding Xen version, but spaces to tabs.
> Still, formally, I have to drop the R-b tags and request for the new
> review.

Is there any reason why this all can't be done in a single patch?

This is just syncing up with the canonical definition in Xen.

-boris