linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] sysctl: death to register_sysctl

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]

Date:   Wed, 3 May 2023 12:23:50 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     ebiederm@...ssion.com, keescook@...omium.org, yzaikin@...gle.com,
        j.granados@...sung.com, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        ebiggers@...nel.org, jeffxu@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] sysctl: death to register_sysctl_paths()

On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 12:10 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Sorry thought you don't mind a few patches, so ditched the formalities
> for the pull.

So I don't mind patches per se, and when there's a reason for them I
have no problem at all taking them.

The reason is typically something like "let's short-circuit the normal
channels just to get this trivial thing sorted out and we can forget
about it", but it can also be just a practical thing like "I'm
traveling so it would be easier if you'd just pick up this patch
directly from the mailing list".

Or it could be "I don't have a git tree since I'm not a main
developer, so I just send patches".

All of those are situations where I'll happily take patches directly.

But on the whole, when there isn't any real reason to avoid a pull
request, I'd much rather have the full thing with signature and
everything...

               Linus