linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] Revert "cfg80211: make WEXT compatibility unselectable"

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, 31 Dec 2014 13:26:53 +0000
From:	"Grumbach, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Arend van Spriel <arend@...adcom.com>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"egrumbach@...il.com" <egrumbach@...il.com>,
	"peter@...leysoftware.com" <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
	"ilw@...ux.intel.com" <ilw@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Berg, Johannes" <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
	"Larry Finger" <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Revert "cfg80211: make WEXT compatibility unselectable"

> 
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2014, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> 
> > You mentioned in the discussion and I quote: "*If* wireless
> > maintainers think otherwise, I'll send a revert request to Linus for
> > consideration.". However, you did not wait for any response from the
> > wireless maintainers nor from the author of the patch you are reverting.
> > Seems like an overreaction to me though personally I do not disgree
> > with the revert itself.
> 
> My understanding from the whole thread was that Emmanuel disagrees with
> the revert, and I consider Emmanuel to definitely belong to the "wireless
> maintainers" group. If my understanding was wrong on this, sorry for that.

You understanding is wrong. This patch has an author and you could I didn't
sign-off the patch which is an obvious indication I am not a "wireless maintainer".
You didn't even make the minimal effort to check how this patch should be properly
routed.

Regardless of all this, I didn't say I disagree, I said that we need to find a way to signal
the userland developers that an API will be deprecated at some point. I haven't seen
any response / suggestion from you on that.

> 
> One way or another, the revert really is a-must-have, as it causes visible
> userspace regressions. I am really surprised that it's causing so lively
> discussion and doubts.
> 
> --
> Jiri Kosina
> SUSE Labs
--
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/