linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] leds: trigger: netdev: Fix kernel panic on interface rename trig notify

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2cf84815-f9b6-4a0a-a3b4-d23628a89aa4@lunn.ch>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 14:41:46 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
	Li Zetao <lizetao1@...wei.com>, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] leds: trigger: netdev: Fix kernel panic on interface
 rename trig notify

> > This should have 'net' in the subject line, to indicate which tree its
> > for.
> 
> No, it shouldn't.
> 
> Contributors aren't obliged to know anything about merging strategies.

With netdev, we tend to assume they do, or at least can contribute to
the discussion. They often know about any dependencies etc which could
influence the decision. When there are multiple subsystem maintainers
involved, i tend to use To: to indicate the maintainer i think should
merge the patch, and Cc: for the rest.

> Why does this need to go in via net?

It does not, as far as i'm aware. Christian, do you know of any
reason?

	Andrew