linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND] soc: qcom-geni-se: Update Tx and Rx fifo depth based on QUP HW version

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 8 Feb 2023 12:57:17 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Visweswara Tanuku <quic_vtanuku@...cinc.com>
Cc:     konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, quic_vnivarth@...cinc.com,
        nicolas.dechesne@...aro.org, srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
        vinod.koul@...aro.org, quic_eberman@...cinc.com,
        quic_satyap@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND] soc: qcom-geni-se: Update Tx and Rx fifo depth based on
 QUP HW version

On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 04:54:13PM +0530, Visweswara Tanuku wrote:
> 
> On 2/6/2023 11:39 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > A:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
> > Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
> > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> > A: Top-posting.
> > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> > 
> > A: No.
> > Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> 
> Apologies will take care.
> 
> > http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> > 
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 07:36:49PM +0530, Visweswara Tanuku wrote:
> > > Added RESEND for resubmission of first version which is not modified in any
> > > way from the previous submission.
> > 
> > Then why was it resent?  What will cause this to be accepted when the
> > previous submission was not?
> > 
> > confused,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/11/21/549
> 
> I had posted the same patch in November last year but did not receive any
> response in spite of periodic reminders.
> 
> Suspecting that the patch did not reach all the required recipients
> re-posted the same and hence RESEND.

When you resend, you need to say _why_ it was resent.  "adding more
people" is a valid reason, don't make us guess.

Remember, some of us get hundreds of patches a day/week to review, we
have no saved context.

thanks,

greg k-h