netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/7] qed*: RDMA and infrastructure for iWARP

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]

Date:   Mon, 19 Jun 2017 04:36:31 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     "Mintz, Yuval" <Yuval.Mintz@...ium.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Kalderon, Michal" <Michal.Kalderon@...ium.com>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/7] qed*: RDMA and infrastructure for iWARP

> I can't really say I understand who would benefit from adding 
> "while at it remove redundant inclusion of header file"
> to the commit log message [And even less from splitting this into its own patch].

Part of it is trust.

If you say you are just renaming, not making any change, reviewers
will not look too deep at the change. But if you do make a change, but
not say anything about it, we loose trust in what you are saying.

    Andrew