netdev - Re: pull request: wireless-next 2012-04-25

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

Date:	Thu, 26 Apr 2012 04:46:34 -0700
From:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...jolero.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	linville@...driver.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pull request: wireless-next 2012-04-25

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:39 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:14:19 -0400
>
>> This is another batch of updates intended for 3.5...
>  ...
>> Please let me know if there are problems!
>
> There are:
>
> From 792545c7bc5d6b922d3778dc602e557d64c83551 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>
> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:55:48 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH 88/88] libertas: include sched.h on firmware.c
>
> Do not assume we have our subsystem including this for us,
> at least for older kernels this is not true. Lets just be
> explicit about this requirement for the usage of wake_up().
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>
> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@...driver.com>
>
> This is bogus, wake_up() is defined in linux/wait.h, the whole
> point of the linux/sched.h split up is so that linux/sched.h
> includes could be removed and replaced with actual dependencies.
>
> Also, please don't accept any patches from Luis that add those
> #undef pr_fmt things to the atheros drivers.
>
> He tried to add it an ethernet driver, and I asked him to explain
> exactly why he's doing and that if it's appropriate then it's
> appropriate everywhere not just in a few specific drivers.  He failed
> to respond to me, and therefore failed to explain the situation and
> address my concerned.  And then I saw just today that he's submitting
> the same patch to wireless drivers.  That's not acceptable.

Sorry about that, I missed your reply, will dig it up and reply.

  Luis
--
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