linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] armv8: gpio: add gpio feature

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]

Message-ID: <20200509182647.GI1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date:   Sat, 9 May 2020 19:26:47 +0100
From:   Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To:     Amit Tomer <amittomer25@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Hui Song <hui.song_1@....com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, jiafei.pan@....com,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] armv8: gpio: add gpio feature

On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 07:18:45PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 11:34:59PM +0530, Amit Tomer wrote:
> > > From what I can tell, these patches are not for the kernel.  The
> > > filenames don't match th kernel layout.
> > 
> > These files looks to be from U-boot, and must be intended for U-boot
> > as I see U-boot mailing address in recipient's address?
> 
> So why is it copied to:
> 
> devicetree@...r.kernel.org - a kernel mailing list
> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org - the main kernel mailing list
> linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org - the gpio driver kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org - the ARM kernel mailing list
> 
> Given that it includes four kernel mailing lists (ok, devicetree
> may be argued to have a wider application), then I don't think the
> conclusion that "it's for u-boot, because there's _one_ u-boot
> mailing list in the recipients" is particularly obvious.
> 
> The author really needs to state that up front if they're sending
> it to a wide audeience, rather than leaving people to guess, thereby
> potentially wasting their time.
> 
> Not only did Andrew review the patch as if it were for the kernel,
> but I also wasted time on this as well when I double-took the
> ifdefs, and wanted to check the current driver in the kernel.

Oh, and... u-boot@...ux.nxdi.nxp.com bounces because that domain is
not resolvable - I guess that is internal to NXP, and this patch
should have remained within NXP and not been posted publically.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 10.2Mbps down 587kbps up