linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 0/9] i2c-mlxbf.c: bug fixes and new feature support

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, 7 Sep 2022 21:42:53 +0000
From:   Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@...dia.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
CC:     "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
        "linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 0/9] i2c-mlxbf.c: bug fixes and new feature support

> What did change since v1 and where did Khalil's Rev-by tags go?
> 
> Khalil told me to remove the rev-by : ) since it is supposed to be reserved for the reviewers.

But he reviewed the patches, or? Which makes him a reviewer? I mean he is the maintainer of the driver, so I basically a Rev-by from him.

Yes he did review the patch internally so I will add the Rev-by in v3

> I will add it back and describe what has changed in my next set of patches.

So, you are planning a v3 already?

I was going to send a v3 patch after I get some feedback on the other patches unless you'd prefer I send it now? 

> As a note , this is what changed from v1->v2:

Cool, thank you for doing that.

> I think this is a bug fix because we have an i2c driver also in UEFI 
> so we need this lock mechanism to avoid race conditions over acquiring 
> the i2c bus. Not using this lock resulted in unexpected behavior.

OK, thank you!