linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tty tree

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]

Date:	Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:15:11 -0400
From:	wfp5p@...idian.itc.virginia.edu (Bill Pemberton)
To:	jslaby@...e.cz (Jiri Slaby)
Cc:	sfr@...b.auug.org.au (Stephen Rothwell), greg@...ah.com (Greg KH),
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tty tree

Jiri Slaby writes:
> 
> On 03/20/2013 03:42 PM, Bill Pemberton wrote:
> > Ok, for the unopened ports there *should* never be any actual data to
> > push so the push is really doing nothing anyhow in these cases.  It's
> > coming from the device sending an initial change port command.
> > 
> > Anyhow, so my patch adding more is_open logic can be dropped and then
> > yours will apply fine.  What's the best way for me to handle this?
> > Send a revert for my patch so yours will apply or send an updated
> > version of your patch that removes my additions?
> 
> Asking Greg to revert should suffice. I commented on that patch, but in
> a different thread, so Greg missed the comment the patch is not needed
> IIRC. What was the title of the patch, I cannot find it immediately :/?
> 

"USB: quatech2: only write to the tty if the port is open." (commit
27b351c in v3.9-rc3).

-- 
Bill
--
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/