netdev - Re: qed, qedi patchset submission

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: <yq1oa0wj4qy.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
Date:   Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:45:41 -0500
From:   "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
To:     Arun Easi <arun.easi@...ium.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: qed, qedi patchset submission

>>>>> "Arun" == Arun Easi <arun.easi@...ium.com> writes:

Arun,

Arun> So far, we have been posting qedi changes split into functional
Arun> blocks, for review, but was not bisectable. With Martin ok to our
Arun> request to squash all patches while committing to tree, we were
Arun> wondering if we should post the qedi patches squashed, with all
Arun> the Reviewed-by added, or continue to post as before?

I guess it depends how things can be split up in a bisectable fashion.

If the net/ pieces can be completely separated from the scsi/ pieces
maybe it would be best to have two patches?

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering