lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 02:29:34 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: Shyam_Iyer@...l.com Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kxie@...lsio.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, open-iscsi@...glegroups.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jgarzik@...ox.com, michaelc@...wisc.edu, swise@...ngridcomputing.com, rdreier@...co.com, daisyc@...ibm.com, wenxiong@...ibm.com, bhua@...ibm.com, divy@...lsio.com, dm@...lsio.com, leedom@...lsio.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4 2.6.28] cxgb3i - cxgb3i iscsi driver From: <Shyam_Iyer@...l.com> Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:37:53 +0530 > Exactly. And I am also suggesting that the driver version is not > standard among different vendors. It should not be standardized because every driver maintainer works differently, and every driver is developed differently, and therefore has different needs and desires for the version number. All that matters is that the driver version makes sense to the person maintaining the driver, and works for them when reviewing bug reports. Look, what you're suggesting is to change existing practice and that doesn't belong in the discussion of the review of a specific driver. If you want to bring that up as a topic and change globally how that is handled, bring that up as a seperate topic on linux-kernel. Don't bug the poor driver submitter who is just following existing and accepted practice. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists