netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/7] ethernet: Remove the Sun Cassini driver

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:   Sat, 7 Jan 2023 15:25:36 +0300
From:   Anatoly Pugachev <matorola@...il.com>
To:     Anirudh Venkataramanan <anirudh.venkataramanan@...el.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/7] ethernet: Remove the Sun Cassini driver

On Sat, Jan 7, 2023 at 1:00 AM Anirudh Venkataramanan
<anirudh.venkataramanan@...el.com> wrote:
>
> In a recent patch series that touched this driver [1], it was suggested
> that this driver should be removed completely. git logs suggest that
> there hasn't been any significant feature addition, improvement or fixes to
> user-visible bugs in a while. A web search didn't indicate any recent
> discussions or any evidence that there are users out there who care about
> this driver. Thus, remove this driver.
>
> Notes:
>
> checkpatch complains "WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does
> MAINTAINERS need updating?". The files being removed don't have their
> own entries in the MAINTAINERS file, so there's nothing to remove.
>
> checkpatch also complains about the long lore link below.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/99629223-ac1b-0f82-50b8-ea307b3b0197@intel.com/T/#t
>
> Suggested-by: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Anirudh Venkataramanan <anirudh.venkataramanan@...el.com>

Do we drop/delete a working functionality by only taking in account
git activity ?

What is a proper way to decline patch series (vs Acked-by) ?

Thanks.