linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH for 3.0] AT91: Change nand buswidth logic to match hardware default configuration

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: <201107041713.23982.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Mon, 4 Jul 2011 17:13:23 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, patrice.vilchez@...el.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for 3.0] AT91: Change nand buswidth logic to match hardware default configuration

On Monday 04 July 2011, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> > In this case, studying the patch more closely shows that it's
> > very harmless, but I'd rather not have to look that closely.
> 
> Well, in fact it is a fix against what was introduced in a 3.0 patch
> which I found to be wrong.
> The reason because I do not want to be in next kernel is the fact that
> it can puzzle the user (people that want to use kernel without changing
> the system_rev between 2.6.39 -> 3.0 and again revert their changes for
> 3.0 -> 3.1).
> 
> > Am I correct that the bug is a regression against 2.6.39?
> 
> No, in fact it was introduced during 3.0 early -rc.

That's what I mean by 'regression against 2.6.39': it was working in 2.6.39,
but later kernels are broken without this fix.

	Arnd
--
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/