linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sound/soc/sof:Use kmalloc

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: <f8e4e44a-4ae9-694a-9fd4-bb6d5ebb8057@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 17:44:30 +0530 (IST)
From: HariKrishna Sagala <hariconscious@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 
    HariKrishna Sagala <hariconscious@...il.com>
cc: lgirdwood@...il.com, peter.ujfalusi@...ux.intel.com, 
    yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com, ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com, 
    daniel.baluta@....com, kai.vehmanen@...ux.intel.com, 
    pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.dev, shuah@...nel.org, perex@...ex.cz, 
    tiwai@...e.com, sound-open-firmware@...a-project.org, 
    linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sound/soc/sof:Use kmalloc_array instead of kmalloc


On Thu, 27 Nov 2025, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 10:35:34AM +0530, HariKrishna Sagala wrote:
>
> > Just checking in to see if you had a chance to review this.
> > If it is missed in the box, please let me know.
>
> Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
> for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so
> on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes)
> please allow at least a couple of weeks for review.  If there have been
> review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed.
>
> Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at
> all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed
> directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches
> anyway, so sending again is generally a better approach though there are
> some other maintainers who like them - if in doubt look at how patches
> for the subsystem are normally handled.
>

Thank you for the clarification and the expected review cadence.
I understand people will be busy with the commitments.
Sorry for reminding for a non-critical patch but I followed-up after 2
weeks.

I will resend the patch as per the subsystem style.
I didn't send this earlier as I followed as per suggestion not to send the
patch again for only a commit message change.
Going forward I will avoid this and allow reasonable time for review
unless a change is urgent.

Thank you for the guidance.