linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] FPGA Manager fix for 5.3

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:   Wed, 24 Jul 2019 07:55:13 -0700
From:   Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>, linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, broonie@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] FPGA Manager fix for 5.3

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:20:56AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:20:12PM -0700, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> > The following changes since commit 5f9e832c137075045d15cd6899ab0505cfb2ca4b:
> > 
> >   Linus 5.3-rc1 (2019-07-21 14:05:38 -0700)
> > 
> > are available in the Git repository at:
> > 
> >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mdf/linux-fpga.git tags/fixes-for-5.3
> > 
> > for you to fetch changes up to c3aefa0b8f54e8c7967191e546a11019bc060fe6:
> > 
> >   fpga-manager: altera-ps-spi: Fix build error (2019-07-23 17:29:17 -0700)
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > FPGA Manager fixes for 5.3
> > 
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > this is only one (late) bugfix for 5.3 that fixes a build error,
> > when altera-ps-spi is built as builtin while a dependency is built as a
> > module.
> > 
> > This has been on the list for a while and I've reviewed it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>
> 
> This message is not in the signed tag in the repo, are you sure you make
> this correctly?  All I see is the first line:
> 	FPGA Manager fixes for 5.3
> 
> And it's a singluar "fix" :)

Yeah, over the top. I wanted to figure out the workflow with an easy
example ... and ... learned something again :)

So basically the message above is what is supposed to go into the tag
message?

> Care to fix this up and resend, or, just send the single patch as email,
> as that's probably easier here.

I've seen you've queued it up the patch by hand, so next time.

Thanks,
Moritz