On 05/23/2014 08:56 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 08:43:01AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 05/23/2014 08:34 AM, Will Deacon wrote: >>> >>> There is also a documentation patch [1] in this series but, >>> again, I didn't CC everybody on it. Sorry, but the level of >>> interest this sort of stuff generates amongst kernel developers >>> is close to zero so I only included people I thought cared on >>> CC for the entire series. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard >>> place trying to CC interested people whilst at the same time >>> trying to avoid spamming all the arch maintainers. >>> >> >> If you are sending me a patch, please include me on the cover >> letter for the patch series. You don't have to send me the >> entire patch series (although for something like a Documentation >> patch which affects x86 I would consider including the union list >> as well.) >> >> I think regardless of level of interest, the definition of >> cross-architectural operations is exactly the arch maintainers >> job, so it isn't really out of place to "spam" us... > > So the one issue I had with that, is that if one tries to send an > email to all arch maintainers + linux-arch + linux-kernel, the > header gets too big and vger chokes and davem slaps you. > > So while its possibly desirable to do big unions with 0/xx and the > like, its practically infeasible. > ... or at least requires the use of a particular advanced technology called Bcc:. Not that I like Bcc:s, mind you, but it is probably better in this case. I have no idea how smart vger is, but it would be interesting if it could ignore addresses from the MAINTAINERS list... -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
