linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: usb: typec: tcpm set port type callback

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: <16cc9d9c-b11f-ecab-857e-854c47e266ad@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Sun, 27 Aug 2017 11:16:03 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: usb: typec: tcpm set port type callback

On 08/27/2017 11:01 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 10:23:24PM -0700, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote:
>> The port type callback call enquires the tcpc_dev if
>> the requested port type is supported. If supported, then
>> performs a tcpm reset if required after setting the tcpm
>> internal port_type variable.
>>
>> Check against the tcpm port_type instead of checking
>> against caps.type as port_type reflects the current
>> configuration.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <Badhri@...gle.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
>> ---
>>   drivers/staging/typec/tcpm.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>   1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> This series is really messed up.  I see patches out of 6 and out of 11,
> and none of it "threaded" so I don't know what is what to apply :(
> 
> Please resend the whole series, correctly, with Guenter's reviewed-by,
> so I know what to apply and in what order.
> 

Agreed, I got confused a bit as well. I think Badhri resent patches 1..6
as part of the 1..11 series and marked those as v2, but he did not mark
patches 7..11 as v2.

Badhri, please mark all patches as v3 and indicate the reason in the
changelog (the reason being to add my Reviewed-by: tag and to fix patch
sequence/version numbers). In general, if you add a patch to a series,
please mark the entire series with the same version and provide a changelog
entry indicating that the patch was added in this version.

Thanks,
Guenter