linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [v3] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated content

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: <CANiq72mw1bis7aE9b=Htx9=Sd9jZH1rJmew1xqhPiCWu=EyzPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:27:17 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, 
	Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, 
	Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>, 
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, 
	NeilBrown <neilb@...mail.net>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, 
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, workflows@...r.kernel.org, ksummit@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v3] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated content

On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 5:42 PM Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> We already have something like this in Documentation/process/howto.rst:
>
>    "Before making any actual modifications to the Linux kernel code, it is
>     imperative to understand how the code in question works."

The patch already mentions something similar as well:

    Ensure that you understand your entire submission and are prepared
    to respond to review comments.

And then talks about the maintainers discretion and rejecting etc. at
the bullet list at the bottom, so it seems fairly clear to me, i.e.
that patches may get "rejected outright" if one cannot explain the
submitted series.

Cheers,
Miguel