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:   Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:52:50 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Gary R Hook <ghook@....com>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, "Hook, Gary" <Gary.Hook@....com>,
        "herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Clean up crypto documentation

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 13:33:27 +0000
Gary R Hook <ghook@....com> wrote:

> > It's been "valid" since I wrote it...it's just not upstream yet :)  I
> > expect it to be in 5.3, though.  So the best way to refer to a kernel
> > function, going forward, is just function() with no markup needed.  
> 
> So I'm unclear:
> 
> 1) would you prefer I wait on your 5.3 change being fully committed,
> 2) add your change to my local tree and use it, then submit an update 
> patchset that depends upon it, or
> 3) re-submit now (using the current method) with suggested changes?

I would just not mark up function() at all, and the right thing will
happen to it in the very near future.

Thanks,

jon

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ