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, 21 Jul 2021 12:33:28 -0500
From:   Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
To:     Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, dan.carpenter@...cle.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        fabioaiuto83@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] staging: rtl8188eu: move all source files from
 core subdirectory

On 7/21/21 2:49 AM, Phillip Potter wrote:
> Dear Larry,
> 
> Whilst I (and no doubt others) are happy to look into what you've
> suggested, I do have a few questions:
> (1) Why is the version from github not the one in staging?
> (2) On a related note, working on it offline is difficult in terms of
> proving contributions, particularly for a kernel mentee such as myself.
> 
> Might I suggest replacing this driver with the one you suggested
> entirely, so work on it can continue in public? I am happy to submit
> this and continue work if you think it would be viable. Many thanks and
> I appreciate your thoughts on this.

The reason that the newer driver is at GitHub, rather than in the kernel, is 
that I never want to devote the 6 months needed to get it into the shape of the 
old one that I did send to staging. If you take a little time to look at the 
GitHub code, you will see what I mean. I did this once before only to have 
Realtek release a new version with all the old warts again. At least we have the 
fact that this is a heritage product, and Realtek will not be releasing any 
newer drivers.

As is, the code generates very few sparse warnings, but it still contains a 
number of local CONFIG variables that would never be accepted in the kernel. It 
also contains a large number of module parameters that need to be evaluated and 
likely removed.

If you wish, I will give you write access to the GitHub repo so that you can 
make changes there. The numerous users will give you instant feedback if/when 
you break something. If you want to use it to replace the kernel version, go 
ahead. I promise that I will not give negative reviews, but I am sure others 
will have such comments. In any case, I will continue to maintain my repo. There 
are too many users with old kernels, and the backports project is difficult to 
use for their level of expertise.

Larry

Powered by blists - more mailing lists