From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:33288 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932313AbeCFSgn (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2018 13:36:43 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w26IZFIa088281 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 13:36:43 -0500 Received: from e06smtp14.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp14.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.110]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ghx1e6ym2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA256 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 06 Mar 2018 13:36:43 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp14.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 6 Mar 2018 18:36:40 -0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 RESEND] tpm: add longer timeouts for creation commands. From: Mimi Zohar To: James Bottomley , "Winkler, Tomas" , Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , "Usyskin, Alexander" , "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2018 13:36:36 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1520353933.5393.21.camel@HansenPartnership.com> References: <20180304121205.16934-1-tomas.winkler@intel.com> <20180305125642.GA3425@linux.intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9422E21E@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180306074932.GB3624@linux.intel.com> <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9422EFFE@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com> <1520353933.5393.21.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1520361396.10396.396.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 08:32 -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 08:06 +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 01:09:09PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > > > > Why you need cover letter? What are u missing in the patch > > > > description > > > > > > If you submit a *patch set* I *require* a cover letter, yes. > > > > It's good but it is not must, you are inventing your own rules. > > As long as the Maintainer is the gatekeeper, you're not going to get > very far with this argument. The fact is that a lot of subsystems have > varying rules; often undocumented, some of which are even in conflict, > like alphabetic vs reverse christmas tree format for includes. > > A cover letter is actually one of the more uniform rules. It's > referred to in submitting patches, but not actually documented there. I've heard that some maintainers are moving away from cover letters, since they are not include in the git repo and are lost. I've seen Andrew Morton cut and paste the cover letter in the first patch description of the patch set. Mimi