linux-kernel - Re: BUG in 2.6.22-rc2-mm1: NIC module b44.c broken (Broadcom 4400)

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]

Message-Id: <200705261736.57362.mb@bu3sch.de>
Date:	Sat, 26 May 2007 17:36:57 +0200
From:	Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>
To:	Uwe Bugla <uwe.bugla@....de>
Cc:	Maximilian Engelhardt <maxi@...monizer.de>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: BUG in 2.6.22-rc2-mm1: NIC module b44.c broken (Broadcom 4400)

On Saturday 26 May 2007 12:40:54 Uwe Bugla wrote:
> Yes! This sort of mistakes is completely impossible, as I use to work with 
> aliases rather than IP adresses. The machine I tried to ping (i. e. my 
> router) is called Jerry (as a reminiscence to Mr. "Captan Trips" from 
> Grateful Dead), and thus "ping jerry" returned the following:
> 
> "destination host unreachable"
> 
> Above that, I state for the second time now that I reverted your patches in 
> 2.6.22-rc2-mm1 with the effect that everything worked perfectly!
> Maxi said something at least similar. So how many proofs do you need, Mister 
> Buesch, to finally pick up patchworking now?? 

How about you stopping with your fucking aggressive wording??

> > Try it again, please.
> 
> NO!
> 
> > And please try with current wireless-dev tree.
> 
> A. I do not know where to download that wireless-dev tree.
> B. I do not know how to implement it into mm or mainline
> C. I have given enough sophisticated proof that your stuff in mm-tree is 
> highly incomplete / buggy.

Ok,

D. As you are not going to help me debugging, I am not going to fix.

> >
> > And I simply do not get it why you suddenly get a good IRQ number, like
> > everybody else does, without fixing The Bug (tm).
> 
> That consequence I already explained:
> But it's a pleasure for me to repeat it once more:
> 
> When you are saying Y to "EISA, VLB, PCI and on board controllers"
> 
> you simply do get not only completely different interrupts for the b4401 
> device, but you get also completely different module dependencies.

That is EXPECTED and I already explained that.
It is a feature. Not a bug.


-- 
Greetings Michael.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/