linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fujitsu-laptop: Support radio LED

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:	Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:03:23 +0200
From:	Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl>
To:	Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...t42.net>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
Cc:	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fujitsu-laptop: Support radio LED

> > Where are we with this? The above reads as "Doesn't appear to break existing
> > systems on hand". Jonathan, are you happy with this patch?
> 
> Sorry, I got caught up over the last couple of weeks with other tasks and
> have not yet managed to confirm the lack of regressions on the S7020.  It
> was on my list for this coming week though.  My comments quoted above were
> theoretical rather than based on an actual test.  The patch appears fairly
> innoculous given that BTNI bit 24 is not set on the S7020 but for
> completeness I would prefer to give it a run on the S7020 before we merge
> the patch.  I will make an effort to fit this in over the next couple of
> days.
> 
> > Michał, do you have plans for a v2?
> 
> I wasn't clear on this myself.  I suspect, given the lack of a v2 in the
> time since the last discussion, that there is no v2 planned at this stage
> and I will proceed with my testing accordingly.

Jonathan, in one of my previous messages [1] I laid out my motivation
for implementing this patch the way I did.  In your response [2], you
wrote:

> This is a quick reply with preliminary information.  I'll follow up in the
> next few days with further details.

Thus, I have been patiently awaiting your response ever since as I see
no reason to rush this patch.

Darren, even if Jonathan is happy with v1 code-wise, I was planning to
post a v2 with an improved commit message (as hinted before [1]).  Yet,
the contents of that message may depend on the results of Jonathan's
tests.

The logical path forward for me would be to wait until Jonathan finds
time to respond to the issues I raised and only then post a v2 with at
least an updated commit message.  Let me know if you would like to
handle this differently.

[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/platform-driver-x86/msg08657.html
[2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/platform-driver-x86/msg08662.html

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Kępień