From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F83C4CECF for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:58:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org [140.211.169.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B19DE20673 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:58:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="AuHOsq9J" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B19DE20673 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ksummit-discuss-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org Received: from mail.linux-foundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B353DA6; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:58:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE3BCDA5 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:58:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-io1-f66.google.com (mail-io1-f66.google.com [209.85.166.66]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2D698A0 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:58:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f66.google.com with SMTP id q1so34758967ion.1 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:58:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fol4ZsNp8Kdo3yO2q1shDBzS/5TjO9ufrtF85Tvjgow=; b=AuHOsq9JFSE5Ify7QRYRkbU2pp/wr3ZndsDy6fRR3fze82MYhF7kgsrsTLe+z47AAK YhsUYhXAqCQy5Oh4PlGj6lDS0wEhHF+ypGGqhnZBESgJTapMgEypq4cu/aFrqpT6qmtz x0VZqOUy4BNlHhiA2hx1YlILYS27L/W8IGf20= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fol4ZsNp8Kdo3yO2q1shDBzS/5TjO9ufrtF85Tvjgow=; b=grrD1xLyUGmrm6Pt6pxc7kuG2cLsM1RbCzdUcLBOFyrVeOPoBcTg9ayUv21Wv0YXz2 47HwDR5hzs5cB/Bs0e6CcK4+6nw7hnsuEjBGsdiQuMHDbaxADXuAqLKVLriShHBbYOVH VB5fp9tstIp8OVuBk3bu9JSEZ1h0bVuMVd63rSZW5B9gDo5cCBSRSm4kdzhAWcRFFBe6 Ug3se7EakAZ05xsjHEXj8mODg8D/0HJ9ECfskHOOa+jQD/9WqzAFksJeGyQcrTClXH7f LULusi6Z/4rMC8TPzlSVL18hGwSx1W54PzcAENbzLKnKgsSeamrnbYyTXnhZ4ukfMODj EKWg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVVmSOx33ibTROBbJyPbBrYzcJDFC2fI16vZSNknXdl/GpJo10a bDMMXqtdIBTjfCDkNtl5+sNH11S2At8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxSu5IE3pc9X1aChGpvsw/DU8GerjmWJBIrBL/T3WsLYYMXuTGuOIzLyh7oV9JmdA3CDb0Ajg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:91c8:: with SMTP id k8mr957ior.232.1569254320580; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:58:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-f52.google.com (mail-io1-f52.google.com. [209.85.166.52]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x2sm9254868iob.74.2019.09.23.08.58.39 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:58:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-f52.google.com with SMTP id n197so34660888iod.9 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:58:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a02:1109:: with SMTP id 9mr121098jaf.90.1569254319004; Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:58:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <156821693963.2951081.11214256396118531359.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <434c05bddd2b364e607e565227487910a8dd9793.1568391461.git.mchehab+samsung@kernel.org> <20190918123620.GA6306@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20190918105728.24e7eb48@coco.lan> <20190919065447.GF2959@kadam> <20190920145352.GI12950@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <87k1a2yqmx.fsf@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <87k1a2yqmx.fsf@intel.com> From: Doug Anderson Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 08:58:28 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Jani Nikula Cc: ksummit , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Dan Carpenter , Linux Media Mailing List Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH] media: add a subsystem profile documentation X-BeenThere: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ksummit-discuss-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org Errors-To: ksummit-discuss-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org Hi, On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 1:56 AM Jani Nikula wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, Doug Anderson wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 7:54 AM Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> And remove Kees Cook and Colin King ? :-) Jokes aside, brushing up > >> get_maintainer.pl a bit is a good idea. I'm for instance not sure adding > >> LKML automatically is a good idea if other mailing lists are already > >> CC'ed, as it's a bit of a /dev/null (albeit with logging, so CC'ing it > >> when no other mailing list is appropriate certainly makes sense). > > > > Please don't do this, as it means the patch won't be findable on the > > "LKML" patchwork instance at: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/project/lkml/list/ > > > > Having LKML copied on all patches is also nice because it makes it > > easier to respond to a patch that was posted to a list you didn't > > subscribe to. I subscribe to LKML and have it redirected to a folder > > that I never look at. Then if I want to find an email thread I can > > search that folder and easily respond from within my normal email > > client. > > > > Is there any downside to CCing LKML? > > I think the question becomes, do we want *everything* posted to LKML? I swear that I was involved in a conversation in the past where someone suggested to stop CCing LKML on patches and Jonathan Corbet jumped in and said that he supported CCing LKML on all patches. I searched for that conversation and couldn't find it, so it's possible I dreamed it. Maybe he can confirm? > For example, based on the last 30 days, the kernel the monthly addition > to LKML traffic from my corner of the kernel would be in this ballpark: > > $ notmuch count date:30d.. to:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org or to:dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org and not to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org and subject:PATCH > 96904 > > OTOH LKML is already a firehose that's impossible to drink from, so not > much difference there... Right. At this point I think LKML is just useful as a dumping ground and not a place to look for patches or conversations without filters. It feels fine to keep using it that way. Having another list (like ksummit-discuss) for conversations with a higher signal-to-noise ratio seems like a fine way forward to me. -Doug _______________________________________________ Ksummit-discuss mailing list Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss