linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH clocksource] Defer marking clocksources unstable to kthread

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: <e344af94-6516-4bfa-bb28-ea65f6bb81f2@paulmck-laptop>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 08:06:11 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jstultz@...gle.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
	christian@...sel.eu, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH clocksource] Defer marking clocksources unstable to
 kthread

On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 09:25:19AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Paul!
> 
> On Wed, Mar 05 2025 at 09:43, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> 
> I'm pretty sure, that I pointed this out to you before:
> 
>    "[PATCH subsys] Short description"
> 
> is not a valid subject line.
> 
> The canonical and documented form is:
> 
>    [PATCH] subsys: Short description
> 
> Can you please stop making your own rules and thereby breaking the
> automated workflow of people so they have to manually fix up your stuff?

Apologies!

I do not recall being chastised on this particular issue, but I clearly
do need to reread submittingpatches.rst more often.

I have adjusted my scripts for this particular issue and will resend v2
of this patch.

							Thanx, Paul