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: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2103081716200.12405@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date:   Mon, 8 Mar 2021 17:16:54 +0100 (CET)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:     Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
cc:     Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org>,
        Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] HID: intel-ish-hid: Drop if block with an always
 false condition

On Mon, 8 Mar 2021, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:

> > > A remove callback is only ever called for a bound device. So there
> > > is no
> > > need to check for device or driver being NULL.
> > 
> > Srinivas, any objections to this patchset? The cleanups look good to
> > me. 
> Sorry, I missed this series.
> No objection for taking these patches.

Thanks. Applied with your Acked-by:
If you disagree with that interpretation of your statement above, please 
holler :)

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ