linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Winbond driver as PNP

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: <11512ed726f2d6754f46e76c7db191a8.squirrel@www.hardeman.nu>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:55:27 +0200 (CEST)
From:	David Härdeman <david@...deman.nu>
To:	"Bjorn Helgaas" <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org,
	"Len Brown" <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Winbond driver as PNP

On Thu, July 9, 2009 23:38, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> Here are two sample patches to show you what I was suggesting.  These
> apply on top of the two Winbond patches currently in -mm.

Thanks, great service :)

I'll test the patches as soon as I have time and access to the hardware.

One question though, the resulting patch series (if AKPM merges these
patches in addition to the existing ones and drops the patch adding
.shutdown to acpi_driver) will be git bisect unfriendly.

Should I roll two new patches instead to replace the three patches
currently in -mm?

-- 
David Härdeman

--
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/