[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <vzys7y22d7zduhcrlqojnavcad5zvxde4axdsgrfpwn3u557iz@cnjbuwkfqiur>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 08:30:03 +0800
From: Coiby Xu <coxu@...hat.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, itrymybest80@...tonmail.com,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
"open list:SECURITY SUBSYSTEM" <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH] integrity: don't throw an error immediately when
failed to add a cert to the .machine keyring
On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 09:59:14AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>On Fri, 2024-01-05 at 21:27 +0800, Coiby Xu wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 12:54:02PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>> >Hi Coiby,
>>
>> Hi Mimi,
>>
>> >
>> >According to https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html,the
>> summary line should be no more than 70 - 75 characters.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing me to this limit! How about
>> integrity: eliminate harmless error "Problem loading X.509 certificate -126"
>
>Still >75. How about the following?
>
>integrity: eliminate unnecessary "Problem loading X.509 certificate" msg
Thanks, v2 now uses the above subject. I thought the limit applies to
the "summary phrase" instead of the whole "summary" and a second look
proved me wrong.
--
Best regards,
Coiby
Powered by blists - more mailing lists