linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 18/25] PCI: pciehp: Use RESPONSE_IS_PCI

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: <20211022070148.GB17656@wunner.de>
Date:   Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:01:48 +0200
From:   Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
To:     Naveen Naidu <naveennaidu479@...il.com>
Cc:     bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Amey Narkhede <ameynarkhede03@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 18/25] PCI: pciehp: Use RESPONSE_IS_PCI_ERROR() to
 check read from hardware

On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 08:52:53PM +0530, Naveen Naidu wrote:
> Lukas, I have not added your Acked-by tag from the v1 [1] of the patch 
> series, since the RESPONSE_IS_PCI_ERROR macro definition slightly 
> changed. I hope this was the right thing to do.
[...]
> If that is not the case please let me know. But I am not sure what to
> do here? If RESPONSE_IS_PCI_ERROR does not fit here, should the right
> option would be to revert/remove this patch from the series?

My Acked-by still stands.  As for the macro name, I'm fine with
whatever Bjorn and the community settle on. :)

Thanks,

Lukas