netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 08/16] spi: davinci: Remove uninitialized

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:   Thu, 2 Jul 2020 08:42:17 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/16] spi: davinci: Remove uninitialized_var() usage

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 04:23:35PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 08:21:40AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 09:39:20PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > Please copy maintainers on patches :(
> 
> > Hi! Sorry about that; the CC list was giant, so I had opted for using
> > subsystem mailing lists where possible.
> 
> If you're going to err in a direction there I'd err in the direction of
> CCing the people not the list - I only saw this since I was looking for
> something else, I don't normally see stuff in the mailing list folder.

Yeah, I've gotten conflicting feedback on treewide changes:
- please CC me on only the one patch, I don't want to see everything else
- please CC me on the whole series, I want the full context for the change

I opted toward "CC me on this series", but then I get stuck when the CC
is giant. I think I may switch back to individual CCs for specific
patches, and point people to lore if they want greater context. (lore
didn't exist before...)

Thanks for the poke to make me reconsider this workflow. :)

-- 
Kees Cook