linux-kernel - Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] wifi: mwifiex: Fix premature release of RF calibration data.

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: <Z-M0W_RzOM9X0x0Y@google.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 15:55:23 -0700
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: Jeff Chen <jeff.chen_1@....com>,
	Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>,
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@....com>,
	"s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] wifi: mwifiex: Fix premature release of
 RF calibration data.

On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 05:45:10PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-03-25 at 16:43 +0000, Jeff Chen wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > I have decided to withdraw the patch. I appreciate your feedback and attention to detail, 
> > which helped identify this oversight.  
> > 
> 
> This goes for _everyone_ on this thread... I applied this patch a long
> time ago. Whatever you need to fix, you need to send new patches.

If it needs withdrawn, I suppose Jeff should send a revert patch then.

> And I guess next time I'm not going to apply any patches for mwifiex
> however innocent they look ... thus making the situation of that driver
> even worse than it is now.
> 
> So please get together and form a plan on how to maintain it.

My 2 cents:

 * Technically, I'm listed as maintainer still. I'm not always prompt,
   but I try to eventually get around to stuff (or at least see that
   Francesco reviews). I believe the previous implicit agreement would
   be that the wireless-drivers maintainer would wait for an Ack from
   sub-maintainer(s) before applying, unless they were truly trivial. I
   don't require that, of course, if you'd like to take things on your
   own Johannes, but that was my previous understanding.
 * I'm also used to seeing email replies when patches get applied. Kalle
   used to do that (presumably from some kind of push-time automation?),
   but I see you don't. You're of course free to do this however works
   best for you, but I find such emails useful for all interested
   parties (authors, reviewers, etc.). For example, if I thought the
   patches were controversial and were on my ToDo list, I'd probably
   speak up sooner.

Brian