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:   Mon, 15 Apr 2019 07:57:11 -0500
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <>
To:     Miquel Raynal <>
Cc:     David Woodhouse <>,
        Brian Norris <>,
        Boris Brezillon <>,
        Marek Vasut <>,
        Richard Weinberger <>,,,
        Kees Cook <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: cfi_util: mark expected switch fall-throughs

Hi Miquel,

On 4/15/19 3:44 AM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Gustavo,
> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <> wrote on Wed, 10 Apr
> 2019 16:16:51 -0500:
>> Hi all,
>> If no one cares I'll add this to my tree for 5.2.
> Which tree are you talking about?

This one:

> Please let the MTD maintainers take patches through their tree. We
> might be late but this is definitely not a good reason to bypass us.
It's a bit confusing when patches are being ignored for more than two

Certainly, Richard Weinberger replied to this one. But I couldn't
find a tree to which this patch was applied, in case it actually

It's a common practice for maintainers to reply saying that a patch
has been finally applied, and in most cases they also explicitly
mention the tree and branch to which it was applied. All this info
is really helpful for people working all over the tree.

I'm only taking this type of patches in my tree when they are being
ignored for a considerable amount of time and even after pinging the


Powered by blists - more mailing lists