From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757786Ab3LESSm (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:18:42 -0500 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:50748 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757254Ab3LESSl (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:18:41 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:18:34 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: David Miller Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org, mingo@kernel.org, henrik@austad.us, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, sbw@mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 tip/core/locking 0/4] Memory-barrier documentation updates Message-ID: <20131205181834.GV15492@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20131205105928.GA27382@austad.us> <20131205122851.GB20562@gmail.com> <20131205085146.0370ea2a@gandalf.local.home> <20131205.130524.997340443429884333.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131205.130524.997340443429884333.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 13120518-0928-0000-0000-0000041CE789 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 01:05:24PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Steven Rostedt > Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 08:51:46 -0500 > > > I wish vger wouldn't do that. I wonder how much spam is really flagged > > by this one characteristic alone. That is, spam that would have made it > > otherwise, but because of the Cc list, it was rejected. > > 10 to 20 spam posts per day are prevented by this rule. > > And frankly it's totally rediculous to have such a huge CC: list > in the first place, even if the vger spam filter didn't exist. > > If you CC: something to netdev, it's going to reach me, you don't need > to CC: me. If just makes for a dup that I have to delete in my inbox, > so you're actually making more work for me in the end. > > That's just one example. Hello, David, The situation that leads me to use a large CC list is when I am doing something that affects all architectures. I could imagine keeping a smallish CC list, then forwarding or bouncing the email to the remaining maintainers Would that work reasonably, or is there some better approach? Thanx, Paul