netdev - Re: [GIT PULL] wireless-next-2025-09-11

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: <2da9103af3f341f05bc8c42e4425ec15231498e5.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 19:01:39 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] wireless-next-2025-09-11

On Thu, 2025-09-11 at 12:08 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> Please pull and let us know if there's any problem.

Speaking of problems ... we've kept adding Link: tags. If you're going
to insist we remove them then please just say so explicitly, reject this
pull request as well if you like, and save everyone the discussion.

I do truly believe Linus to be wrong on this: assuming a patch has no
need for any identification/correlation whatsoever before it goes into
his (or a feeder) tree (and gets a stable sha1) is akin to assuming it
has no life before it actually ends up there, which I think is
completely out of touch with reality. But he does ultimately get to
reject pull requests, so...

Maybe I should make the links go to patchwork, because there you have
the CI results ... maybe that could be construed as useful information
in the "Linus sense" (phrased that way because to me the mailing list
posting is already useful information)?

johannes