netdev - Re: [PATCH net-26 1/5] cxgb4vf: Virtual Interfaces are always up ...

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:34:23 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	leedom@...lsio.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-26 1/5] cxgb4vf: Virtual Interfaces are always up
 ...

From: Casey Leedom <leedom@...lsio.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:31:32 -0800

> | From: Casey Leedom <leedom@...lsio.com>
> | Date: Monday, February 14, 2011 11:13 am
> | 
> | | No driver specific module parameters!  Add something generic and common
> | | so other drivers can use it too.
> | | 
> | | Otherwise every user has to learn a different way to control this
> | | attribute, depending upon the device type, which is rediculious.
> | | 
> | | How many times do we have to tell driver authors this?
> | 
> |   Sorry.  I wasn't aware of this rule.  My bad.  Is this writeen down
> | somewhere under Documentation?  I'm not being snarky.  I really would like
> | to know so I can read through the general ground rules and avoid making
> | more mistakes in the future.
> | 
> |   As for a generic mechanism, what's the preferred way of doing this?  A
> | new ethtool flag?  Sorry for being a doofus here, I'm happy to follow
> | whatever the accepted standard is.  Thanks for your time and patience.
> 
>   Also, I assume then the the entire patch series is now rejected, right?  And 
> that I should resubmit the patch series without the unacceptable module 
> parameter, right?  I'm just trying to figure out what I need to do next.  

You need to resubmit the whole series, because changing an earlier
patch causes the subsequent ones to have, at a minimum, offsets which
GIT apply will reject.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html