linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 2/2] 9p: remove unused code in 9p

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: <HE1PR0802MB255555FEE31EBF85981A2AC4F4910@HE1PR0802MB2555.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Sun, 28 Jun 2020 07:37:47 +0000
From:   Jianyong Wu <Jianyong.Wu@....com>
To:     Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
CC:     "ericvh@...il.com" <ericvh@...il.com>,
        "lucho@...kov.net" <lucho@...kov.net>,
        "v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
        <v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@....com>,
        Kaly Xin <Kaly.Xin@....com>, Justin He <Justin.He@....com>,
        Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@....com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 2/2] 9p: remove unused code in 9p

Hi Dominique,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2020 1:52 PM
> To: Jianyong Wu <Jianyong.Wu@....com>
> Cc: ericvh@...il.com; lucho@...kov.net; v9fs-
> developer@...ts.sourceforge.net; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Steve
> Capper <Steve.Capper@....com>; Kaly Xin <Kaly.Xin@....com>; Justin He
> <Justin.He@....com>; Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@....com>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] 9p: remove unused code in 9p
>
> Jianyong Wu wrote on Sun, Jun 28, 2020:
> > These code has been commented out since 2007 and lied in kernel since
> > then. it's time to remove thest no used code.
>
> Good point, happy to take this - please resend without RFC separately (the
> two commits aren't related) after fixing the commit message (lie/lay is
> complicated and I'm not sure what should be used there but lied definitely
> isn't correct, the qualification doesn't really matter though so probably
> simpler to remove; and 'thest no used code' does not
> parse)
>
Thanks, I think "lay" is right. I will fix it and resend.

Thanks
Jianyong

> --
> Dominique
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.