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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 28 Aug 2017 09:55:26 -0700
From:   Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: usb: typec: tcpm set port type callback

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> 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.


Apologies for sending a confusing patch stack.
I wasnt aware of the procedure to add new patches to an already sent patchlist.
Thanks for advising on this. Resending the patch series with
Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, will change the version
number to v3  and the sequence number as well.
Now that I am aware of this, will follow this in the future as well.

>
>
> Thanks,
> Guenter