netdev - Re: [PATCH] forcedeth: new backoff implementation

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: <20080411215056.6338f4e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:50:56 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Oeser <netdev@...eo.de>
Cc:	Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@...dia.com>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	nedev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] forcedeth: new backoff implementation

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:52:38 +0200 Ingo Oeser <netdev@...eo.de> wrote:

> Subject: Re: [PATCH] forcedeth: new backoff implementation

Dumb question: is there anything particularly forcedeth-specific in this
new backoff implementation?

If not, and if it might be valuable to other drivers, should it not be
implemented that way?

In an ideal world, I'd have been able to answer my own question by reading
the changelog, but it's a rather poor changelog, sorry.  It doesn't even
tell us why forcedeth needs a new backoff implementation.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html