On Sun, 29 Oct 2017, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Jani, > > On Friday, 27 October 2017 21:45:17 EET Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: >> > Add a jump target so that a bit of exception handling can be better reused >> > at the end of this function. >> > >> > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. >> >> Please also look into the GCC software, which will detect that your >> patch does not compile. > > Just for the record, I've been bitten in the past by applying one of Markus' > patches that seemed to make sense, only to discover later that it introduced a > security hole. I now drop his patches altogether, so could you please keep an > eye open to make sure none of them touching the rcar-du driver will be applied > through drm-misc ? Ack. You're the maintainer, and we need to respect that. In general, I'll pick up any patches that are good, but the current track record is that Markus' patches need extra scrutiny, and many of the patches contain subjective changes that lead to debate that is not constructive. There's no return on investment here. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
