linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 0/3] Standardize link status check to return bool

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: <aCb8wauW4h85F8YS@ryzen>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 10:52:17 +0200
From: Niklas Cassel <cassel@...nel.org>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc: lpieralisi@...nel.org, kw@...ux.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
	jingoohan1@...il.com, Hans Zhang <18255117159@....com>,
	robh@...nel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 0/3] Standardize link status check to return
 bool

Hello Mani,

On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 10:33:59AM +0100, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 11 May 2025 00:07:07 +0800, Hans Zhang wrote:
> > 1. PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool.
> > 2. PCI: mobiveil: Refactor link status check.
> > 3. PCI: cadence: Simplify j721e link status check.
> > 
> 
> Applied, thanks!
> 
> [1/3] PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool
>       commit: f46bfb1d3c6a601caad90eb3c11a1e1e17cccb1a
> [2/3] PCI: mobiveil: Refactor link status check
>       commit: 0a9d6a3d0fd1650b9ee00bc8150828e19cadaf23
> [3/3] PCI: cadence: Simplify j721e link status check
>       commit: 1a176b25f5d6f00c6c44729c006379b9a6dbc703
> 

This was all applied to the dw-rockchip branch.

Was that intentional?

My guess is that perhaps you thought that
"PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool"
was going to conflict with Hans's other commit:
5e5a3bf48eed ("PCI: dw-rockchip: Use rockchip_pcie_link_up() to check link
up instead of open coding")

but at least from looking at the diff, they don't seem to touch the same
lines, but perhaps you got a conflict anyway?



mobiveil and cadence patches seem unrelated to dw-rockchip
(unrelated to DWC even).

If it was intentional, all is good, but perhaps the branch
should have a more generic name, rather than dw-rockchip,
especially now when the reset-slot and qcom-reset slot patches
are also on the same branch.


Kind regards,
Niklas