linux-kernel - Re: Linux 3.0: broken ums

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:05:08 +0200
From:	Andreas Hartmann <andihartmann@...19freenet.de>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 3.0: broken ums_eneub6250

Greg KH schrieb:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 09:25:43PM +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>> Greg KH schrieb:
>>> On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 10:16:49AM +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>>> Greg KH schrieb:
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 08:39:20PM +0200, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> obviously, nobody seems to be interested to work on this bug. Until it's
>>>>>> fixed: There is a workaround to get the device working again with 2.6.39
>>>>>> and 3.0 - just remove the unusable ums-eneub6250.ko and replace it with
>>>>>> the complete old and fine keucr-module - staging but working :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709243#c1
>>>>>
>>>>> How about working on a patch for the in-kernel version of the code to
>>>>> get it to work properly so we can resolve this?
>>>>
>>>> If I would be able do this, I would have done it! On the other side: Why
>>>> should I do it, if there is a module, which works just fine?
>>>
>>> Because I'm guessing that you wish to see the in-kernel code work
>>> properly, right?
>>>
>>>> But you could send me patches which I could test.
>>>
>>> Have you emailed the developers of this driver these questions?  I'm
>>> sure they could help you out as they do have the hardware and they wrote
>>> the patches in the first place.
>>>
>>>>>  Given that very few
>>>>> people actually have this hardware,
>>>>
>>>> It's a MSI CR620 notebook. I don't think, that there are just very few
>>>> out there :-).
>>>>
>>>>> it's hard for us to work on the
>>>>> driver.
>>>>
>>>> Why did you remove a working module if you can't ensure, that the
>>>> replacement will cover the old module 100%?
>>>
>>> Because I trusted the original developers of that patch, that's the way
>>> kernel development works.
>>>
>>> So please contact them and they would be glad to work with you to
>>> resolve this issue.
>>
>> They have been already connected prior in this thread. I didn't get any
>> answer right now.
>>
>> Obviously they are not interested in fixing the problem.
> 
> That's rude, 

I apologize for this. This was wrong. But I was really angry about this
line of action.

> perhaps they were busy, or, the driver works for them on
> their hardware, but something is different with your device that is
> different here.

It's fixed now. Details see
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709243#c7

Unfortunately I had to open another bug now with this module:
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711496#c0


Andreas
--
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/