| 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: <20141128203248.GA26878@kroah.com> Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 12:32:48 -0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: Mariusz Gorski <marius.gorski@...il.com> Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/9] staging: panel: Use defined value or checking module params state On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 08:50:55PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:57:06AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:24:17AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:26:59PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 01:58:01PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 09:38:46PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote: > > > > > > Avoid magic number and use a comparison with a defined value instead > > > > > > that checks whether module param has been set by the user to some > > > > > > value at loading time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mariusz Gorski <marius.gorski@...il.com> > > > > > > Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > v2: Don't introduce new macros for param value check > > > > > > > > > > > > drivers/staging/panel/panel.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > Ugh, I messed up here, and applied the first series, which was acked. > > > > > > > > > > Mariusz, can you resend the patches that I didn't apply, I can't seem to > > > > > get the rest of these to work properly. > > > > > > > > Greg, if I get you here correctly, you've applied all 9 patches from v1 > > > > and none from v2, so what you need now is a v1->v2 patch, right? > > > > > > No, I think I applied the patches sent _before_ the 9 series, it was 4 > > > or 5 or so, you should have gotten an email about them. Pull my > > > staging-testing branch and redo your remaining patches please. > > > > And the reason I got confused was because you didn't label your second > > set of patches "v2", which it was, I saw two separate series, one with a > > few patches, and then 2 sets of 9, the second set labeled "v2" so I > > thought they were independant. Please think of the poor maintainer who > > has to decipher things like this when you send them out... > > I'm confused right now. As you say, first I've sent a patchset of 4: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/11/963 Which I applied. > Then, a couple of days later, I've sent the initial patchset of 9: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/18/922 > > And a day I've sent a fixed version of the above patchset, labeled with v2: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/19/653 So I thought your series of 9 was separate from the series of 4, you can see my confusion (remember, I receive on _average_ about 1000 emails a day). > Isn't this the right way to do? I still don't get my mistake. Because > what I was just about to do is to resend the v2 patchset, but now I'm > not sure anymore if this is what I'm supposed to do. > > BTW: Out of these 3 patchsets, 1st and 3rd should be applied. I tried to apply the 3rd, but it didn't apply due to patches I applied in your first set of 4 patches. Does that help? greg k-h -- 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