netdev - Re: [PATCH 02/14] net/fec: release mem_region requested in probe in error path and remove

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: <20110215085305.GL13279@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:53:05 +0100
From:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, shawn.guo@...escale.com,
	kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] net/fec: release mem_region requested in probe
 in error path and remove

Hi David,

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 11:05:49AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:25:25 +0100
> > On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 01:15:31PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> >> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 22:07:09 +0100
> >> > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 09:25:32PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> >> >> I can't pull from that tree because it is _NOT_ based upon net-next-2.6
> >> >> and therefore brings in all kinds of commits not related to your work.
> >> > Sorry, I'm not used to the customs on netdev.  I can rebase, but still I
> >> > wonder about the reason you cannot pull for.  The only reason I can
> >> > imagine is that you fear unrelated breakage when taking these patches
> >> > that are already in Linus' tree.  But if it's that, wouldn't it be great
> >> > the realize this breakage already now and not only during the next merge
> >> > window?
> >> 
> >> My trees only merge in Linus's tree when absolutely necessary,
> >> to resolve conflicts or similar.
> > You don't merge Linus' tree, you merge mine that just happen to be based
> > on a newer version of Linus' tree. I'm sure Linus won't yell on you for
> > that. He only objects to merge directly from his tree, because the
> > result for him is an "empty" merge.
> 
> You don't get it.
> 
> These merge commits look ugly and Linus wants them minimized.
Hmm, right, I don't get why this looks uglier for Linus than a merge of
a tree that bases on something you already have.  I guess you're too
annoyed by now to explain why you think it does.
 
> Either you follow the rules and my expectations, which is that when you
> give me a GIT tree to pull from it's based upon one of my trees, or
> I don't pull from you.
So I rebased my tree on something older.  It now starts at

	c69b909 (pch_can: fix module reload issue with MSI)

which is already in net-next/master.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
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