linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v0.1 0/9] UMCG early preview/RFC patchset

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:   Fri, 21 May 2021 10:04:04 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     Peter Oskolkov <posk@...gle.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Peter Oskolkov <posk@...k.io>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrei Vagin <avagin@...gle.com>,
        Jim Newsome <jnewsome@...project.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v0.1 0/9] UMCG early preview/RFC patchset

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 05:15:41PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:

> > There is this Linux Plumbers video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXuZi9aeGTw
> > And the pdf: http://pdxplumbers.osuosl.org/2013/ocw//system/presentations/1653/original/LPC%20-%20User%20Threading.pdf
> > 
> > I did not reference them in the patchset because links to sites other
> > than kernel.org are strongly discouraged... I will definitely add a
> > documentation patch.
> 
> Certainly for links to email, we prefer to use lore.kernel.org archives.
> Are links to other sites discouraged?  If so, that's news to me.

Discouraged in so far as that when an email solely references external
resources and doesn't bother to summarize or otherwise recap the
contents in the email proper; I'll ignore the whole thing.

Basically, if I have to click a link to figure out basic information of
a patch series, the whole thing is a fail and goes into the bit bucket.

That said; I have no objection against having links, as long as they're
not used to convey the primary information that _should_ be in the
cover letter and/or changelogs.