linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Remove unnecessary ret init

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 08:26:18 -0800
From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Jithu Joseph <jithu.joseph@...el.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Remove unnecessary ret init

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 06:12:00PM +0200, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024, Ashok Raj wrote:
> 

[snip]

> 
> Hi,
> 
> I was thinking of merging it myself into pdx86 review-ilpo -> next after 
> allowing it sit on the queue a day or two. IMO, doesn't need to be more 
> complicated than the usual process kernel process with patches, it would 
> just take extra time from all the more there are middlemens handling the 
> patch (after all this is just a trivial cleanup which I noticed while 
> reviewing the patches you sent and since it didn't conflict the series, 
> I just sent the obvious cleanup).
> 
> But that's assuming you don't have anything conflicting beyond those 
> patches which you sent? If that's the case, it would be better for you to 
> take care of it so just let me and I won't merge it myself until it comes 
> back.

I don't have anything beyond this that conflicts with this change.

Feel free to add 

Reviewed-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>