linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] vma count: fixes, test and improvements

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: <20250915170550.f24bfb96514835154e8d1633@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 17:05:50 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>
Cc: minchan@...nel.org, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, david@...hat.com,
 Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, rppt@...nel.org, pfalcato@...e.de,
 kernel-team@...roid.com, android-mm@...gle.com, Alexander Viro
 <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara
 <jack@...e.cz>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Vlastimil Babka
 <vbabka@...e.cz>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko
 <mhocko@...e.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu
 <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Juri
 Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Vincent Guittot
 <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
 Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Valentin
 Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Shuah Khan
 <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] vma count: fixes, test and improvements

On Mon, 15 Sep 2025 16:10:55 -0700 Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com> wrote:

> > fwiw, there's nothing in the above which is usable in a [0/N] overview.
> >
> > While useful, the "what changed since the previous version" info isn't
> > a suitable thing to carry in the permanent kernel record - it's
> > short-term treansient stuff, not helpful to someone who is looking at
> > the patchset in 2029.
> >
> > Similarly, the "how it was tested" material is also useful, but it
> > becomes irrelevant as soon as the code hits linux-next and mainline.
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> Thanks for the feedback. Do you mean the cover letter was not needed
> in this case or that it lacked enough context?

The latter.  As I've split up the series, please put together some
words to describe the remaining 6 patches if/when resending.

Thanks.