netdev - Re: [PATCH net,stable] net: usb: Add HP hs2434 device to ZLP exception table

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: <20130829.003352.1187611479213752660.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 29 Aug 2013 00:33:52 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	robmatic@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, bjorn@...k.no,
	oliver@...kum.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net,stable] net: usb: Add HP hs2434 device to ZLP
 exception table

From: Rob Gardner <robmatic@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 18:40:22 -0600

> The exception list means "usb_device_id entries for specific devices
> that are known to need the workaround." There are just two such entries.
> There isn't even a separate list. So maybe we just have a nomenclature
> problem, and we could simply be calling this a "white list" instead of
> "exception list". The other possible meaning of whitelist (all devices
> that *don't* need the workaround) is unthinkable, as that would be a huge
> list and much more prone to be unmanageable than what we've got now.

Ok I misunderstood.  I thought we were discoving that all chips which
have been thoroughly investigated end up needing the workaround.

I guess it's only a specific family of these chips which seem to all
have the problem?
--
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