| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20120523104115.GL4637@mwanda> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 13:41:15 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> To: Samuel Iglesias Gonsalvez <siglesias@...lia.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Staging: ipack: fix failure registering an ipack device On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:13:14AM +0200, Samuel Iglesias Gonsalvez wrote: > Trying to install an ipack device it always failed in the match() function. This > patch fixes all the bugs present there. > This looks like part of it is undoing stuff introduced in [patch 1/3]? I was going to ask what the stuff was in 1/3 and then it got removed which makes me wonder why even more. Could you write something about why in your changelog? Or if it's not needed then remove it from the first patch. Really it would be easier to review if you broke it up into one patch per bug, with a description of what the bugs were instead of "patch fixes all the bugs present there". Some of these changes don't seem necessary. It feels like you were debugging and then when you got match() to work you just committed all the changes instead of only the lines which are needed. regards, dan carpenter -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists