netdev - RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [next] igb: allow setting MAC address on i211 using a device tree blob V5

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:	Tue, 1 Mar 2016 23:23:23 +0000
From:	"Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
To:	John Holland <jotihojr@...il.com>
CC:	"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [next] igb: allow setting MAC address on i211
 using a device tree blob V5

> From: John Holland [mailto:jotihojr@...il.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 10:56 PM
> To: Brown, Aaron F <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
> Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next] igb: allow setting MAC address on i211
> using a device tree blob V5
> 
> On Mar 1, 2016, at 03:52, Brown, Aaron F <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > This throws a few checkpatch warnings, but I won't withhold my tested by
> for these:
> >
> > total: 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 checks, 21 lines checked
> >
> > Your patch has style problems, please review.
> >
> > NOTE: If any of the errors are false positives, please report
> >      them to the maintainer, see CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
> > u1463:[0]/usr/src/kernels/next-queue>
> 
> Thanks for testing...
> 
> Do you require me to reformat the patch text? And won't that break the link?

Unless Jeff Kirsher wants you to resubmit it for the space between your name and email address I don't think resubmitting should be necessary.  Yes, breaking the URL up would break the URL and for that reason I think it is appropriate to ignore that (Possible unwrapped commit description) warning.

Thanks,
Aaron
> 
> John