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:   Fri, 26 Jan 2018 11:13:00 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     ecree@...arflare.com
Cc:     fengguang.wu@...el.com, kbuild-all@...org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com, bkenward@...arflare.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] sfc: efx_default_channel_want_txqs() can
 be static

From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 15:13:05 +0000

> On 26/01/18 01:03, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> Fixes: 2935e3c38228 ("sfc: on 8000 series use TX queues for TX timestamps")
>> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
> Acked-by: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
> 
> Dave, can you take this directly or do you need it reposted without RFC tags?  I'm not sure what the procedure is for robopatches.

No I cannot.

Don't you even notice that the subject line and commit message are
totally inaccurate?

They say that one function is being marked static.

But the patch actually marks two different functions static, as well
as a structure which is also completely not mentioned in the commit
message nor subject line.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ