netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/3] ath10k: sdio: use same endpoint id for all packets in a bundle

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:   Fri, 29 Jun 2018 16:51:51 +0300
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...aro.org>
Cc:     alagusankar@...ex-india.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        ath10k@...ts.infradead.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ath10k: sdio: use same endpoint id for all packets in a bundle

Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...aro.org> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 02:53:44PM +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> writes:
>> 
>> > Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...aro.org> writes:
>> >
>> >> All packets in a bundle should use the same endpoint id as the
>> >> first lookahead.
>> >>
>> >> This matches how things are done is ath6kl, however,
>> >> this patch can theoretically handle several bundles
>> >> in ath10k_sdio_mbox_rx_process_packets().
>> >>
>> >> Without this patch we get lots of errors about invalid endpoint id:
>> >>
>> >> ath10k_sdio mmc2:0001:1: invalid endpoint in look-ahead: 224
>> >> ath10k_sdio mmc2:0001:1: failed to get pending recv messages: -12
>> >> ath10k_sdio mmc2:0001:1: failed to process pending SDIO interrupts: -12
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Alagu Sankar <alagusankar@...ex-india.com>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...aro.org>
>> >
>> > You have Alagu's s-o-b first so that implies Alagu is the author. So
>> > should I add From header for Alagu and add you (Niklas) as
>> > Co-Developed-by? Or vice versa?
>
> Hello Kalle,
>
> It is not always obvious how the combination of git-author
> and Co-Developed-by should be:
> http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1801.2/00988.html

Yeah, that's true.

> Alagu deserves most credit, since I have simply taken parts
> of a very big patch and split it into smaller pieces.
> I tried to do the right thing by having his Signed-off-by first.
>
> Let's go with your suggestion and add a From: header with
> Alagu's email, and a Co-Developed-by tag with my email.
> (Note that both Signed-off-bys are still needed according to
> submitting-patches.rst)

Ok.

> Do you want me to resend the patches with these two lines
> added, or can you fix them up manually?

No need, I did that already in the pending branch. Please check:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/commit/?h=pending&id=6b23bd067990df1cc1e9a4c28327393a7a3ba718

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/commit/?h=pending&id=bf83a5c572e0737e59e026c989b190b4e52d2ef4

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git/commit/?h=pending&id=218f924d80b76520a4e60eead5e89f3ebd2e86c1

-- 
Kalle Valo