linux-kernel - Re: bcm43xx regression in 2.6.24 (with patch)

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, 22 Feb 2008 23:38:34 +0300
From:	"Alexey Zaytsev" <alexey.zaytsev@...il.com>
To:	"Michael Buesch" <mb@...sch.de>
Cc:	"Alexey Zaytsev" <zaytsev.a@...tei.ru>, "Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bcm43xx regression in 2.6.24 (with patch)

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de> wrote:
> On Friday 22 February 2008 21:06:00 Alexey Zaytsev wrote:
>  > >  It is not my problem, if you refuse to use b43.
>  > >  You also still refuse to tell me details about your card and _what_
>  > >  does not work. I do own lots of different card and they
>  > >  all work fine with b43. There's one exception, the 4311 rev 3 (or something,
>  > >  don't quite remember). But patches are available and will ship in 2.6.25.
>  > >  bcm43xx won't get removed until that shipped.
>  >
>  > Yes, it's a 4311 rev 01, but I'm probably was just too lame to upgrade the
>  > firmware or something. :E
>  >
>  > I really don't get it, what is going on here? You state that the new b32 driver
>  > has problems on some hardware, where the old bcm43xx driver just works.
>  > And at the same time, you are surprised that I "refuse" to use the b43 driver
>  > and push patches for the bcm43xx driver you broke... Oh, really, why?!
>
>  So, please find someone who will sign-off your patch. I won't.
>  What's so hard to understand about that? Do I _have_ to sign off all patches
>  random people send to me?
>  I do _not_ want to be made responsible for that patch by signing it off.
>  It is as simple as that.
>  And I officially do not care about bcm43xx since a year and a half anymore.
>  So why should I ACK it or sign it off?
>

I thought that there was a rule that if you break something in the kernel, you
normally would be the one who fixes things up. Sorry, it looks I was wrong.

I'll resend the patch directly to Greg KH and Jeff Garzik for -stable and 2.6.25
inclusion.
--
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/