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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:10:36 +0200 From: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com> To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> Cc: Xie Qirong <cheerx1994@...il.com>, Franky Lin <franky.lin@...adcom.com>, Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@...adcom.com>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: btcoex: replace init_timer with setup_timer On 5/12/2017 10:54 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com> writes: > >> On 5/12/2017 10:19 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Xie Qirong <cheerx1994@...il.com> writes: >>> >>>> The combination of init_timer and setting up the data and function field >>>> manually is equivalent to calling setup_timer(). This is an api >>>> consolidation only and improves readability. >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Xie Qirong <cheerx1994@...il.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> setup_timer.cocci suggested the following improvement: >>>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/btcoex.c:383:1-11: Use >>>> setup_timer function for function on line 384. >>>> >>>> Patch was compile checked with: x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_BRCMFMAC=y + >>>> CONFIG_BRCMFMAC_USB=y + CONFIG_BRCMFMAC_PCIE=y + CONFIG_BRCM_TRACING=y + >>>> CONFIG_BRCMDBG=y >>>> >>>> Kernel version: 4.11.0 (localversion-next is next-20170512) >>> >>> How is this different from the first version? >>> >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9709467/ >> >> Hi Kalle, >> >> This is actually the third version. You are referring to the >> not-specifically-named "v2" here, but how are you to know ;-) > > Exactly :) > >> This third version is the same as v1 on which I commented to put the >> coccinelle output in the commit message. So I would still keep v2 if >> nothing else changed in v3 apart from my Acked-by: tag. > > Ok, but I can easily take v3 (ie. this one) so that you get credit ;) If you add the coccinelle output in the commit message, ie. above the '---' that would be great. So for both you have to do additional stuff provided you find it useful to have the coccinelle output. :-p Regards, Arend
Powered by blists - more mailing lists