netdev - Re: [PATCH for-next 2/2] net/mlx5: Update mlx5

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, 12 Apr 2016 12:13:12 +0300
From:	Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To:	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>
Cc:	Leon Romanovsky <leon@...n.nu>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
	Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
	Tal Alon <talal@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 2/2] net/mlx5: Update mlx5_ifc hardware features

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Saeed Mahameed
<saeedm@....mellanox.co.il> wrote:

> Why would you break down this patch to many when no matter what you
> do, at the end it would look the same ?
> As Leon mentioned we MLNX maintainers prefer to update this file at
> once when possible.

See my response to Leon. It happened to me many times in code review
that people gave
me patches that open X fields in the IFC file and their code used Y <<
X fields. I don't
want the IFC file to have even one unused field, and I think the
correct way to do that
is have both the IFC file and the driver changes in the same series. I
understand the trend
to have zero-conflicts, lets try that. Did you make sure all exposed
IFC fields are used?

Or.