linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] dts: misc: Add bindings documentation for bmc-misc-ctrl

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]

Date:   Wed, 04 Jul 2018 01:39:53 +1000
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, joel@....id.au,
        Eugene.Cho@...l.com, a.amelkin@...ro.com, stewart@...ux.ibm.com,
        openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] dts: misc: Add bindings documentation for
 bmc-misc-ctrl

On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 16:31 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 12:16:49AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 09:50 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 05:04:10PM +1000, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > I can't take patches without any changelog text at all :(
> > 
> > Greg (and replying to your other comments as well)...
> > 
> > This is an RFC series, it's not meant for you to take at this point,
> > it's about discussing the overall approach to exposing BMC random
> > "tunables" as explained in patch 0 of the series.
> > 
> > Yes the individual patches aren't yet at the level of polish for a
> > formal submission, we (naively ?) thought that's what the whole RFC tag
> > is about :-)
> 
> Oh come on, putting a basic "here is what this patch does" comment
> should be part of every patch, otherwise what is there to comment on if
> we don't know what is going on in the patch itself?

Well, it adds documentation :-) You can just read the patch which is
... the documentation :)
> 
> Anyway, I provided a bunch of feedback to the "real" patch in this
> series...

Yes, you did that's fine. Thanks.

Cheers,
Ben.