linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: qcom: MSM8996 depends on COMMON

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: <20201030184613.GK4405@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 30 Oct 2020 18:46:13 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        moderated for non-subscribers <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: qcom: MSM8996 depends on COMMON_CLK

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 11:31:25AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:

> Ping. I am still seeing this kconfig warning in linux-next 20201030.

Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so 
on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes)
please allow at least a couple of weeks for review.  If there have been
review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed.

Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at
all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed
directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches
anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are
some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches
for the subsystem are normally handled.

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