linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/12] blk: use for_each

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, 11 Jul 2018 23:08:40 +0200
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/12] blk: use for_each_if

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:06 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 01:31:51PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> I don't think there's a git easy way of sending it out outside of
>> just ensuring that everybody is CC'ed on everything. I don't mind
>> that at all. I don't subscribe to lkml, and the patches weren't
>> sent to linux-block. Hence all I see is this stand-alone patch,
>> and logic would dictate that it's stand-alone (but it isn't).

Hm yeah I forgot to add linux-block. But others where there's no
dedicated list (or get_maintainers.pl didn't have one) also complained
about not getting Cc'ed, and I can't Cc everyone for sweeping changes.

> What I sometimes do is including a short blurb on each patch giving
> the overview and action hints (e.g. this is part of patchset doing XYZ
> and should be routed such and such).  It's a bit redundant but has
> worked pretty well for patchsets with dependenat & sweeping changes.

Yeah I guess I can just copypaste/summarize patch 1 to all the
subsequent patches, sounds like the best option.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch