linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] list private v2 & luo flb v9

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: <aUT0sJsDWZHGT-Q9@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:46:08 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>, pratyush@...nel.org,
	dmatlack@...gle.com, skhawaja@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
	corbet@....net, kees@...nel.org, davidgow@...gle.com,
	pmladek@...e.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	nicolas.frattaroli@...labora.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	tamird@...il.com, raemoar63@...il.com, graf@...zon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] list private v2 & luo flb v9

On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 01:07:25PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 10:57:47 -0500 Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com> wrote:
> 
> > This series includes two separate workstreams. This is because FLB
> > should be applied on top of list_private, as it uses some of its
> > interfaces.
> > 
> > 1. List private v2 (first 3 patches) Previous version:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251126185725.4164769-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com
> > For details, please read the cover letter from the previous submission.
> > 
> > v2 Changelog:
> > - Added a Reviewed-by from David Gow.
> > 
> > 2. LUO FLB v9 (last 2 patches) Previous version:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251125225006.3722394-2-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com
> 
> Please, no.
> 
> This patch series is intended for the Linux kernel.  Your grandchildren
> will read the above wondering "what did granddad do".  It's just lazy
> for us to expect readers to have to chase down links to earlier
> versions and then to figure out what changed and why we changed it,
> etc, etc.
> 
> Let's give our audience a nice, self-contained and complete description
> of the proposed changes which doesn't refer them to the minute details
> of the ongoing development process.  A process which is utterly
> uninteresting three years from now.
> 
> IOW, can we please have a complete and standalone description of *this
> patchset* which doesn't refer to earlier obsolete stuff?

And I would even say this should be two patchsets, one with private list
and the other one with FLB.
 
> Thanks.

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.