netdev - Re: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 13/17] s390: bpf: eliminate zero extension code-gen

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:   Fri, 3 May 2019 15:41:19 +0200
From:   Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:     Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
Cc:     alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 13/17] s390: bpf: eliminate zero extension
 code-gen

On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 11:42:40AM +0100, Jiong Wang wrote:
> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
> Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
> ---
>  arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

When sending patches which affect s390, could you please add Martin
and me on cc to _all_ patches? We now received only the cover-letter
plus one patch. It's always hard in such cirumstances to figure out if
the code is doing the right thing.

Usually I end up looking up the missing patches within other mailing
lists, however I haven't subscribed the bpf and netdev mailing lists.

The extra e-mail volume because of being added to CC really doesn't
matter at all.