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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 05 Oct 2021 17:24:26 +0300
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue>
Cc:     Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, ath9k-devel@....qualcomm.com,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "John W . Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>,
        Simon Wunderlich <sw@...onwunderlich.de>,
        Sven Eckelmann <sven@...fation.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ath9k: interrupt fixes on queue reset

Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue> writes:

> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 09:25:12PM +0200, Linus Lüssing wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> The following are two patches for ath9k to fix a potential interrupt
>> storm (PATCH 2/3) and to fix potentially resetting the wifi chip while
>> its interrupts were accidentally reenabled (PATCH 3/3).
>> 
>> PATCH 1/3 adds the possibility to trigger the ath9k queue reset through
>> the ath9k reset file in debugfs. Which was helpful to reproduce and debug
>> this issue and might help for future debugging.
>> 
>> PATCH 2/3 and PATCH 3/3 should be applicable for stable.
>> 
>> Regards, Linus
>> 
>
> I've marked PATCH 3/3 as "rejected" in Patchwork now due to
> Felix's legitimate remarks.

BTW I prefer to mark patches as rejected myself in patchwork so that I
know what's happening (patchwork is lacking in this respect as it
doesn't notify me if there are any changes in patches). But good that
you mentioned this via email so I didn't need to wonder what happened.

> For patches 1/3 and and 2/3 I'd still like to see them merged upstream
> if there is no objection to those.

Thanks, I was about to ask what I should do with this patchset.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

Powered by blists - more mailing lists