linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] Initial patch set for PURWA-IOT-EVK

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: <f54f4eda-5776-4a68-a661-b66619ef9041@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 14:51:25 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
        Yijie Yang <yijie.yang@....qualcomm.com>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, konradybcio@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
        krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] Initial patch set for PURWA-IOT-EVK

On 19/01/2026 14:35, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 1/19/26 7:54 AM, Yijie Yang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/19/2026 2:34 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 10:39:04AM +0800, Yijie Yang wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>>>>> Changes in v4:
>>>>>> - EDITME: describe what is new in this series revision.
>>>>>> - EDITME: use bulletpoints and terse descriptions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh no. B4 probably even warned you about not sending it out.
>>>>>
>>>>>   From this changelog I can assume that nothing has changed. Is it
>>>>> correct?
>>>>
>>>> This section was generated automatically by b4 and was not reviewed
>>>> carefully. The actual list of changes is in the section below.
>>>
>>> But why????? Why do you ignore what was done for you and write it on
>>> your own, reversing the order, etc? And even if you decided to ignore it
>>> for any reason, why didn't you delete it?
>>
>> The confusion was caused by mixing b4 and git format-patch to handle fine‑grained patch formatting. The Git configuration Konrad suggested did not work for me. I ran b4 prep --manual-reroll <msg-id> to allow b4 to track the upstream thread, which caused this section to be generated automatically. I did not notice this and mistakenly re‑wrote it myself.
> 
> I found that I have additional options set in my *local* gitconfig:
> 
> [diff]
>         renameLimit = 999999
>         rename = true

This one does not exist. You wanted "renames" but you set it two lines
below.

>         algorithm = histogram
>         renames = copies
> 
> Perhaps that was the missing piece!
> 
> Konrad


Best regards,
Krzysztof