linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: r8188eu: use a delayed worker for led updates

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YaomR72ytUd9jmAt@kroah.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Dec 2021 15:14:31 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
        Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: r8188eu: use a delayed worker for led updates

On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 02:04:27PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> This was confusing becuase it should have been [PATCH 4/4 v2].  These
> days I think the prefered way is to just resend the whole series as a
> new thread.
> 
> Greg doesn't use patchwork, but these rules especially apply for
> subsystems which use patchwork.  People say that patchwork gets confused
> when people use the --in-reply-to option and I guess it's hard to
> apply individual patches in patchwork?  Anyway, just always start a new
> thread and resend everything.
> 
> Send a reply to the original thread to say "Don't apply this one, it has
> sleeping in atomic bugs", otherwise it might get applied by mistake.

I had already reverted that patch from my tree, so I would not have
applied it again :)

thanks,

greg k-h