linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] PCI: protect restore with device lock to be consistent

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: <8696d4cf-144d-dbc0-1950-93d42529971a@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:39:50 -0400
From:   Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, timur@...eaurora.org,
        alex.williamson@...hat.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] PCI: protect restore with device lock to be
 consistent

On 10/11/2017 6:08 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> I think this series makes a lot of sense overall; thanks for doing
> this work!  I had a few comments on the individual patches.
> 
> (This response would ordinarily be to the cover letter, but there
> isn't one, so I'm just responding to the first patch.)

Thanks, I was too lazy to type it up. I'll do it on the next one.
Since this was an RFC even though the subject doesn't say so, I didn't
want to invest too much time on documentation.

-- 
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.