linux-kernel - Re: Fwd: Kernel 6.6.1 hangs on "loading initial ramdisk"

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:   Sun, 10 Dec 2023 11:17:16 +0100
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
        Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     bwg <whirl@...otilta.ca>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, shibedrill1@...il.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Kernel 6.6.1 hangs on "loading initial ramdisk"

On 10.12.23 08:30, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On 12/10/23 14:15, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
[...]
>> [1] This is why: You just added Ard and Boris to the CC, but did not
>> make it obvious *why* they should care about that mail. They (and all
>> the other recipients) for sure will have no idea what a1b87d54f4e45f
>> exactly is, so you should have mentioned the commit summary. And doing
>> that after a big quote makes it worse, as many people now need to scroll
>> down to see if that mails contains something that might be relevant for
>> them -- and just a waste of time if not.
>>
>> Furthermore, sending the first mail of the thread to all those people
>> and lists was likely not very wise, as nobody is likely to care in a
>> case like this. And not removing all those people and lists in the
>> second mail of the thread make it a lot worse, as it became clear that
>> many people and list do not care about it now that the regression was
>> bisected. Hence it's best to remove them, we all get enough mail already.
>>
>> All that makes people ignore mails from you -- and maybe about
>> regression tracking in general. :-(
> 
> Oops, I didn't greet additional Cc's as you mentioned (that's my
> tendency when handling regressions).

Well, yes, but as mentioned  that is just one of several things that
were slightly off.

> So maybe we continue tracking this on Bugzilla or keeping on ML or
> both?

Not sure what you mean. I'll reply in private, no need to bother the
others with even more mail.

BTW: Ard, I noticed you got involved in the ticket. Thx for that!

Ciao, Thorsten