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: <69a6c4b8-e58b-4a04-7868-b2f4376cecd9@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:09:02 +0100
From:   Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, mkl@...gutronix.de,
        kernel@...gutronix.de, david@...tonic.nl,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] net: dsa: sja1105: print info about probet chip
 only after every thing was done.



On 25.11.19 11:39, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 12:32, Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de> wrote:
>> On 25.11.19 11:22, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>>> On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 12:03, Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Currently we will get "Probed switch chip" notification multiple times
>>>> if first probe filed by some reason. To avoid this confusing notifications move
>>>> dev_info to the end of probe.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>> Also there are some typos which should be corrected:
>>> probet -> probed
>>> every thing -> everything
>>> filed -> failed
>>>
>>> "failed for some reason" -> "was deferred"
>>
>> Ok, thx.
>>
>> should i resend both patches separately or only this one with spell fixes?
>>
> 
> I don't know if David/Jakub like applying partial series (just 2/2). I
> would send a v2 to each patch specifying the tree clearly.
> Also I think I would just move the "Probed...." message somewhere at
> the beginning of sja1105_setup, where no probe deferral can happen.

Ok, I'll drop the second patch by now, currently it is not critical issue for me.

Kind regards,
Oleksij Rempel

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ