linux-kernel - Re: [v5 0/1] dax: enable dax fault handler to report VM_FAULT

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:   Tue, 27 Jun 2023 10:25:59 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>
CC:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        "Ira Weiny" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        "Jane Chu" <jane.chu@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [v5 0/1] dax: enable dax fault handler to report
 VM_FAULT_HWPOISON

Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Would you insist on the usage of cover letters also for single patches?
> >
> > I would neither insist on it, nor prohibit it.
> 
> It seems that you can tolerate an extra message here.
> 
> 
> > It simply does not make enough difference.
> 
> Can it occasionally be a bit nicer to receive all relevant information within a single patch
> instead of a combination of two messages?

No, I am the maintainer of this code and everything I needed to judge
this patch was provided. This cover letter only included inter-version
details and anything relevant for the kernel history is included in the
patch itself.

For any code I maintain inter-version details below the --- line or in a
0/1 cover letter are perfectly acceptable.

Please, if the review feedback is arbitrary, as it is in this case,
strongly consider not offering it.