netdev - Re: [PATCH net v4] r8169: Bad implementation of netif_carrier

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: <20160211.061250.1340671752357908695.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:12:50 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	asd@...ian1000.go.ro
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4] r8169: Bad implementation of netif_carrier_*

From: Corcodel Marian <asd@...ian1000.go.ro>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 12:52:49 +0200

> On Thu, 2016-02-11 at 03:39 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Corcodel Marian <asd@...ian1000.go.ro>
>> Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 08:27:43 +0200
>> 
>> >   On probe stage what carrier to stop and rest two situation
>> >   netif_carrier_* is slow and disturbing autonegociation process.
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Corcodel Marian <asd@...ian1000.go.ro>
>> 
>> This doesn't tell us at all why your change is valid.  You aren't
>> going into the details of what you mean by "disturbing" and why it
>> being "slow" is really a problem.
>> 
>> In general, your patches are of a very low quality.  You give never
>> give us enough information to properly evaluate your patch.
>> 
>> It is unlikely that even one of your patches will be applied by
>> me until you fix this fundamental problem with your submissions.
> 
> May bee netif_carrier_* is good on slow changes of link good status of
> interrupt ,is unable to keep track changes from link good interrupt.

You're still not telling us anything.

The situation with your submissions is not improving.

Sorry.