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: <20130521.013912.96249995742935192.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 21 May 2013 01:39:12 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	or.gerlitz@...il.com
Cc:	eilong@...adcom.com, eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, donald.c.skidmore@...el.com,
	e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, willemb@...gle.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, hpa@...or.com, eliezer@...ir.org.il
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 3/4] ixgbe: Add support for ndo_ll_poll

From: Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:24:41 +0300

> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:14 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> From: "Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
>> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 10:06:43 +0300
>>
>>> Hopefully this series will be accepted so we can send follow up support
>>> for the bnx2x as well.
>>
>> I think in two or three more iterations it will be merged.
>>
>> There are no objections on the fundamentals, it's just implementation
>> details and coding style at this point.
> 
> Dave, sorry, I might be a bit behind the rest of the reviewers, but I
> just fail to understand nor find any reference that explains the
> module param of ixgbe nor it makes sense to me to merge that piece of
> the code upstream (its not for staging, correct?), as I wrote here
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=136908123432072&w=2 basically, I
> know you're not a great fun of module params (to say the least) and
> surely not something named  "allow_unsafe_removal", thoughts?

It's one of those "implementation details", I hate it too.
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ