From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Luming Yu <luming.yu@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
tglx@linutronix.de, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, jcm@jonmasters.org,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: What is the right practice to get new code upstream( was Fwd: [patch] a simple hardware detector for latency as well as throughput ver. 0.1.0)
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:20:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120613152045.81ab66d9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJRGBZw2TctmBxRuA-byaGNCs=1v+M-1PXSm+OuwWApSqu7UjA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 20:57:02 +0800
Luming Yu <luming.yu@gmail.com> wrote:
> I need to know what the right practice is to get your attention to
> accept a new tool upstream like this one.
Seems that you have some good feedback from Arnd to be looking at. I'm
usually the guy for mysterious misc stuff such as this, so please cc me
on future revisions.
The name "hw_test" and "HW_TEST" is too vague. The topic "testing
hardware" is very broad, and this module only touches a small fraction
of it, so please think up a far more specific name.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-13 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-12 12:57 What is the right practice to get new code upstream( was Fwd: [patch] a simple hardware detector for latency as well as throughput ver. 0.1.0) Luming Yu
2012-06-12 14:42 ` Jimmy Thrasibule
2012-06-12 14:57 ` Luming Yu
2012-06-13 22:20 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-06-14 9:25 ` Luming Yu
2012-06-14 10:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-14 14:15 ` Luming Yu
2012-06-21 13:29 ` Robert Richter
2012-06-21 14:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120613152045.81ab66d9.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=jcm@jonmasters.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luming.yu@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox