netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/4] net-next: mediatek: IRQ cleanups, fixes and grouping

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, 16 Jun 2016 11:51:34 +0200
From:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:	John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
	keyhaede@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nbd@....name
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] net-next: mediatek: IRQ cleanups, fixes and grouping

On 06/16/2016 11:44 AM, John Crispin wrote:
> On 16/06/2016 07:20, David Miller wrote:
>> From: John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>
>> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:58:46 +0200
>>
>>> This series contains 2 small code cleanups that are leftovers from the
>>> MIPS support. There is also a small fix that adds proper locking to the
>>> code accessing the IRQ registers. Without this fix we saw deadlocks caused
>>> by the last patch of the series, which adds IRQ grouping. The grouping
>>> feature allows us to use different IRQs for TX and RX. By doing so we can
>>> use affinity to let the SoC handle the IRQs on different cores.
>>
>> This patch series doesn't apply cleanly to the net-next tree, I get rejects
>> on patch #4.
>
> it depends on the series with the 11 fixes that i sent last week which
> is however in the net tree and not the next tree (i also still had the
> DQL hack in my tree). if i resend this at the start of the next rc1
> would you merge it into the net tree so that it becomes part of v4.8 ?

Well, it would rather require a merge of -net into -net-next then. But
that would be useful indeed.

Cheers,
Daniel