linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: bcachefs: Add explicit title for idle work design doc

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: <yyqgq3brwrstiaqydzv4ua5syesrg4gh7w4uhtwg3flhuxa4ji@7xciwgaluwux>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 22:31:43 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Documentation <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, Linux bcachefs <linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: bcachefs: Add explicit title for idle
 work design doc

On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 09:29:19AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 09:08:22PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > -Idle/background work classes design doc:
> > > +Idle/background work classes desiderata
> > 
> > .....
> > what's going on with that spelling?
> 
> I'm just suggesting a better title, though. Should I keep it or revert back
> to design doc?

Revert back to design doc, please.

(I genuinely had not seen that word before; usually prefer to keep
things simple).