linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 1/5] usb: xhci: Change the XHCI link order in the Makefile

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 21 May 2020 08:37:07 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Alan Cooper <alcooperx@...il.com>
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        ": Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/5] usb: xhci: Change the XHCI link order in the
 Makefile



On 5/20/2020 11:09 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
> 
> A: No.
> Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
> 
> http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
> 
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 01:29:45PM -0400, Alan Cooper wrote:
>> Greg, Alan,
>>
>> The other 4 related patches were accepted into usb-next and I just
>> realized that this one didn't make it. This patch will not fix the
>> "insmod out of order" issue, but will help our controllers work with
>> some poorly behaved USB devices when the drivers are builtin.
> 
> As it doesn't solve the real issue, I did not accept this so that you
> all can continue to work on creating a real solution that works for both
> situations (built in and as modules.)
> 
> I thought I said that already...

Your message was not clear to me at least, I understood your message as:
I acknowledge the problem you are trying to solve and accept Al's
solution for the case where modules are built-in, and another solution
should be found for when the modules are built as loadable modules.

But okay, your message is clear now :).
-- 
Florian