linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] drivers/tty/serial/8250: refactor sirq and lpc address setting code

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YHAEfn4li6F8L9JC@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
Date:   Fri, 9 Apr 2021 02:38:38 -0500
From:   Zev Weiss <zev@...ilderbeest.net>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
        "openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org" <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] drivers/tty/serial/8250: refactor sirq and lpc
 address setting code

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:24:08AM CDT, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>On Thursday, April 8, 2021, Zev Weiss <zev@...ilderbeest.net> wrote:
>
>> This splits dedicated aspeed_vuart_set_{sirq,lpc_address}() functions
>> out of the sysfs store functions in preparation for adding DT
>> properties that will be poking the same registers.  While we're at it,
>> these functions now provide some basic bounds-checking on their
>> arguments.
>>
>>
>
>Please, use prefix “serial: 8250_aspeed_vuart:” instead of what you have in
>the subject line. I think I have told this already
>
>

Ah, sorry -- I fixed the cover letter after your first comment (which 
had definitely been under-tagged); for the patches themselves I was 
following the example of the last patch in that particular area 
(8d310c9107a2), though I guess that wasn't the right model to follow.  
I'll use the requested format in the future.