linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] spi: dw: support 4-16 bits per word

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAAh8qsxKQF4ZPJACYy03z9LQzU0tBB9wv9ztZ3AC4kE_OHGH4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Sep 2018 15:37:30 +0200
From:   Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...inj.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] spi: dw: support 4-16 bits per word

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 3:23 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 01:23:34PM +0200, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 1:09 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > > Please don't send new patches in reply to old patch serieses, it makes
> > > it harder to follow what the current version of things is and makes it
> > > much easier for the patches to get lost in the old threads.
>
> > Ok, no problem and thanks for the hint! Where does this requirement
> > come from? Patchwork or mail sorting habits?
>
> Mail sorting.  It can mean that you get things like someone deleting a
> thread and the new patch getting caught up in a thread delete command
> and hence missed.
>
> > Anyway, how does this continue, will you pick the patch or do I need
> > to somehow collect yet more reviews?
>
> You should've got a mail at about the same time saying it's been
> applied.

Right, got it. Thanks again.