linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3.12 16/33] isdn/gigaset: reset tty->receive_room when attaching ser

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: <56003EF1.8070405@imap.cc>
Date:	Mon, 21 Sep 2015 19:31:29 +0200
From:	Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc>
To:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
Cc:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.12 16/33] isdn/gigaset: reset tty->receive_room when
 attaching ser_gigaset

Am 21.09.2015 um 18:54 schrieb Peter Hurley:
> On 09/21/2015 09:38 AM, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>> Am 21.09.2015 um 15:13 schrieb Peter Hurley:
>>> On 09/18/2015 08:38 AM, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
>>>> Am 17.09.2015 um 20:13 schrieb Peter Hurley:
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...p.cc> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>>> - The requirement for line disciplines to set receive_room wasn't (and
>>>>>> btw still isn't) documented anywhere, so it's unlikely anything actively
>>>>>> relied on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nevertheless, that is the requirement, and what every other in-tree line
>>>>> discipline does.
>>>>
>>>> Your word for it. Still I don't understand the curious resistance to
>>>> documenting it. If it is the requirement, why keep it secret?
>>>
>>> Nothing sinister here :)
>>>
>>> Feel free to submit documentation patches.
>>
>> I already did. For some unknown reason nobody wants to merge them.
> 
> I vaguely recall that. A quick search reminded me there were unaddressed
> comments wrt that patch:  https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/14/608

Ah, so that's the blocking condition? How can I address that comment in
order to unblock that patch?

-- 
Tilman Schmidt                              E-Mail: tilman@...p.cc
Bonn, Germany
Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite)


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)