netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] netxen: write IP address to firmware when using bonding

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]

Date:	Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:38:55 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	nikolay@...hat.com
Cc:	sony.chacko@...gic.com, agospoda@...hat.com,
	rajesh.borundia@...gic.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] netxen: write IP address to firmware when
 using bonding

From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 11:20:06 +0200

> I just synced with upstream, I've missed a few patches and it seems
> that it doesn't apply cleanly because my previous patch was
> changed before it was applied. There is one character missing from
> a comment - "/* root bus? */", in upstream it was changed to
> /* root bus */.
> ("netxen: check for root bus in netxen_mask_aer_correctable")
> 
> About the rest, after QLogic test the functionality I'll clean-up the
> empty lines and re-send it.

Can you please not quote an entire patch just to make a small series
of comments?

Just quote the exact relevant portions of the patch if you want to
specifically make comments about something.

Quoting the entire patch is extremely bad netiquette, wastes
bandwidth, and everyone on the list has to receive a whole new copy of
the entire patch again for no good reason.
--
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