netdev - Re: [PATCH] dp83640: don't recieve time stamps twice

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:   Wed, 19 Apr 2017 13:53:26 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:     Sørensen, Stefan 
        <Stefan.Sorensen@...ctralink.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dp83640: don't recieve time stamps twice

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:31:35PM +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:16:56AM +0000, Sørensen, Stefan wrote:
> > You are correct that these lines was added accidentally.
> 
> Can we please fix this in another way?  There is no need to hold the
> spin lock during the callback into the networking stack.  Instead, how
> about the following diff, which also fixes the other call site...
> 

I'm fine with this.  I hated my changelog, as well because it sounds
like guess work.  Could you send it with a:

Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>

regards,
dan carpenter