linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] IB/hfi1: Add ioctl() interface for user commands

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: <20160513143346.GA6665@phlsvsds.ph.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 May 2016 10:33:47 -0400
From:	Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>
To:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
Cc:	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
	Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...el.com>,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
	Mitko Haralanov <mitko.haralanov@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] IB/hfi1: Add ioctl() interface for user commands

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:28:21PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:48:16PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
>> were going to rip out the EEPROM code.  In any case, the best fix would
>> be to rebase the two series that are remaining and move any "rip out
>> things like eeprom support" patches to prior to the ioctl patches and
>> make it so that they rip out the write interface version of it instead,
>> and then squash a second copy of the ioctl removal into this patch.
>
>Yes, this would look best

The end result will end up being the exact same code so I don't have a 
problem doing that. 

Perhaps it would be better if I just combine the two patch sets into one 
series? I still need to look more into the kobj stuff about the cdev, if 
needed I'll add a patch for that as well.

-Denny