linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] Staging: ipack: fix failure registering an ipack device

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, 23 May 2012 12:42:11 +0200
From:	Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez 
	<siglesias@...lia.com>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.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, 2012-05-23 at 13:41 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 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.
> 

Yes, you are right. I will work again on these patches.

Thanks,

Sam


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)