linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Change Maintainer for some at91 drivers

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:   Thu, 2 Jul 2020 15:39:09 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, sre@...nel.org,
        Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
        Codrin Ciubotariu <codrin.ciubotariu@...rochip.com>,
        Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Change Maintainer for some at91 drivers

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 03:42:24PM +0200, nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com wrote:

> I kept these entries together as it may generate conflicts if handled
> separately. I suggest that Mark take the chunk as maintainer of SPI and
> Audio sub-systems.
> Anyway, don't hesitate to tell me if I should handle this change
> differently or at another time during the development cycle.

That works for me (though I'd be a bit surprised if it generated
conflicts), Sebastian?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)