linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce configfs-based interface for gpio-aggregator

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]

Message-ID: <vscpr2piax6vgbrkbrfi5iboszymcuotflqjnk2jufannsgmvn@s6dyfs4ftbk3>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 11:41:43 +0900
From: Koichiro Den <koichiro.den@...onical.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, geert+renesas@...der.be, 
	linus.walleij@...aro.org, maciej.borzecki@...onical.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce configfs-based interface for
 gpio-aggregator

On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 05:10:07PM GMT, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 1:26 PM Koichiro Den <koichiro.den@...onical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 06:22:50PM GMT, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > >
> > > I too think a-1 is the best option. However, I'd go for line0, line1
> > > etc. convention as for computers it doesn't make any difference while
> > > for humans it's more readable.
> >
> > Thank you for the comments. I’ll address your feedbacks and send "v2"
> > later, Since we seem to agree on the overall approach, I’ll send it as
> > [PATCH v1] (i.e., without the "RFC").
> >
> 
> No, please don't. It'll be confusing. The RFC WAS the v1. Next
> iteration must be v2 with a changelog.

Ok, I'll send it as v2. Thanks!

-Koichiro

> 
> Bartosz