linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] staging: r8188eu: add error handling of rtw

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: <10877752.rW0qT3HDr3@localhost.localdomain>
Date:   Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:51:51 +0200
From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
To:     Larry.Finger@...inger.net, phil@...lpotter.co.uk,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, straube.linux@...il.com,
        Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] staging: r8188eu: add error handling of rtw_read16

On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 11:55:37 AM CEST Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> On 8/25/21 12:48 PM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 10:22:16 AM CEST Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> >> On 8/25/21 7:35 AM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> >> > Dear Pavel,
> >> > 
> >> > Please note that if and when my patch "Use usb_control_msg_recv / send () in
> >> > usbctrl_vendorreq ()" will be merged, "if (res! = len)" will always evaluate 'true'
> >> > and usb_read16 () will always return -EIO even if usbctrl_vendorreq () succeeds.
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> Yep, thank you, but it depends on which series will go in first :)
> >> 
> >> There is a chance, that you will need to clean up this part, if mine 
> >> will be merged before yours
> >> 
> > 
> > Ha-ha ... I know that beautiful rule: whoever breaks must fix!
> > However there should be another rule which says that
> > the old (me) takes precedence over the young (you) :-)
> > 
> 
> The main problem, that no one knows who is the "old". Greg can take 
> patches in any order he wants, because they are naturally independent :)
> 
> 
> We only can say smth like "this one depends on this one" as reply to 
> patch to inform Greg about the situation.
> 
> > Seriously, thank you so much for your help and the "Reviewed by"
> > tag on my work.
> > 
> 
> You too :) We are doing same job here for the good of community and 
> kernel itself
> 
Pavel, Dan,

Did you really take my "old" vs. "young" precedence rule seriously?

I was just kidding, ahead of thanking Pavel for his "Reviewed-by" tag
to my patch.

That statement deserved no comment. I thought it was
clear it was just a joke :)

Thanks,

Fabio
> 
> 
> With regards,
> Pavel Skripkin
>