linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: Fix to recursion protection for 5.15

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHk-=wicuM=0iMeRCrbG=MMLZRdwihpZ64rWxDqidEjMa-YDsA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Oct 2021 20:27:07 -1000
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: Fix to recursion protection for 5.15

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 8:16 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>
> Generally, a tool like b4 should be able to create a list of any
> email addresses in a thread linked commit.

I really think Cc lines are very useful.

That said, they are *more* useful when they are thought about, than
when they are automated.

IOW, the "these people are relevant to this patch" is simply very
useful information, and no, neither "get_maintainer" nor some set
gathered automatically from a patch submission is a replacement for
actual _thought_ behind it.

I will, for example, strive to put the people who _participated_ in
some discussion as the "Cc" list - they may not have acked a patch, or
reviewed it, but they might have piped up in the discussion, and that
probably merits them then knowing about any problems it causes.

And honestly, the "b4" information you mention is almost useless. Why?
Because people who do the "Link:" and "Cc:" information based on the
automation they picked up the patch from often don't look at the part
that is _really_ relevant, namely the discussion that _caused_ the
patch. IOW, the original report, possibly earlier versions of the
patch etc etc.

Mindless "take the cc list from the emailed submission of the patch"
is still somewhat useful in that it avoids having to look it up later
when something happens, but really, a bit of human mindful editing is
probably called for.

                 Linus