linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: hns: bug fix about hisilicon TSO BD mode

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: <20160118.115524.1656097226798937868.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:55:24 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	huangdaode@...ilicon.com
Cc:	yisen.zhuang@...wei.com, yankejian@...wei.com,
	liguozhu@...ilicon.com, salil.mehta@...wei.com,
	geliangtang@....com, lipeng321@...wei.com,
	andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kenneth-Lee-2012@...mail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: hns: bug fix about hisilicon TSO BD mode

From: Daode Huang <huangdaode@...ilicon.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:24:16 +0800

> The current upstreaming code fails to set the tso_mode register
> when initilizes, when processes large size packets, the default 4 bd is
> not enough, so this patch initilizes it and set the default value to 8 bds
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daode Huang <huangdaode@...ilicon.com>

Your insistance of continually using "net-next" in your subject lines
shows you have no idea what GIT trees are active and in what trees
development and bug fixing is actually occurring in.

The 'net' tree is the only tree active now and your driver has been in
there for over a week.

And this is the place where all appropriate bug fixes go.

Therefore if your code is present in the 'net' tree and you are fixing
things in that codebase, then that is the tree you target.

I've been silently applying your patches there instead of net-next,
but I'm not going to do it any more and I will just reject patches not
submitted properly from this point forward.

Thanks.