netdev - Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: pcie: reduce "unsupported splx" to a warning

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: <CAEUsAPYOnSu5x3oak380YzrJPM3_N1bz2efkZQZ-8vLeTD286Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 11 Oct 2016 09:27:36 -0500
From:   Chris Rorvick <chris@...vick.com>
To:     Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc:     Luca Coelho <luca@...lho.fi>,
        Intel Linux Wireless <linuxwifi@...el.com>,
        Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        Oren Givon <oren.givon@...el.com>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: pcie: reduce "unsupported splx" to a warning

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Chris Rorvick <chris@...vick.com> wrote:
> I didn't receive your email so I'll try to respond via Paul's.

>>> If this is really bothering you, I guess I could apply this patch for
>>> now.  But as I said, this is not solving the actual problem.
>>
>> Bikeshedding: I think IWL_INFO() is more appropriate, as info doesn't
>> imply one needs to act on this message, while warn does imply that
>> action is needed.
>
> Agreed.  I still think making this a warning is appropriate, but it
> seems pretty clear this is not an error.  This has nothing to do with
> how much it bothers me.  An error tells the user something needs to be
> fixed, but in this case the interface is working fine.  Making it a
> warning with an improved message will result in fewer people wasting
> their time.

I found your original email on lkml.org... should have looked there in
the first place!  Yes, if there is a fix for the underlying issue then
that is obviously preferred.  When I investigated this I saw several
reports spanning at least a few distros and kernel versions with at
least some concluding "this is normal".

Again, thanks!

Chris