linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -stable] Add USB PID for new MOSCHIP USB ethernet controller MCS7832 variant

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101130212918.GA20472@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de>
Date:	Tue, 30 Nov 2010 22:29:18 +0100
From:	Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -stable] Add USB PID for new MOSCHIP USB ethernet
 controller MCS7832 variant

[trimmed receivers since it's less relevant]

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 01:13:54PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:05:10PM +0100, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> > From having read that perhaps 2 or 3 times (randomly)
> > and following a couple dozen -stable mails I had the impression that
> > remembering the constraints would be quite easy; obviously not - sorry!
> > Did have some doubts about the number of hunks, though.
> > And obviously violated the "must be upstream" rule.
> > 
> > So what to do?
> 
> Read the line in that file that says:
> 	 - To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree,
> 	   add the tag
> 	        Cc: stable@...nel.org
> 	   in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be
> 	   applied to the stable tree without anything else needing to
> 	   be done by the author or subsystem maintainer.
> 
> > Shovel patch as-is to networking only (optionally specifying the
> > somewhat unclearly formulated Cc: stable mechanism)?
> > Or rather minimalist-reduce the patch, then dito?
> 
> See above.

Hmm, that doesn't fully answer it.
Anyway, I know what I'll do.

> > > Sometimes I wonder why we even write documentation if no one ever reads
> > > it...
> > 
> > I could also mention some (strangely familiar) cases where people _didn't_
> > write kernel docs which many people likely would have liked to read
> > to avoid wasting half-millions of dollars... *smirk*
> 
> Examples?  And are those people likely to put up the money to write
> those docs?  That's the big problem, people like to complain, but not
> pay anyone to do the work...

I was sheepishly referring to an earlier patch.
Indeed, there's too much complaining and a dearth of activity sometimes.

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Andreas Mohr
--
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/