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  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:   Tue, 10 Dec 2019 10:41:54 -0800
From:   Jeff Kirsher <>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <>
Subject: Re: [net-next v3 00/20][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver
 Updates 2019-12-09

On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 14:25 -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 10:06:41AM -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > > Please don't send new RDMA drivers in pull requests to net. This
> > > driver is completely unreviewed at this point.
> > 
> > This was done because you requested a for a single pull request in an
> > earlier submission 9 months ago.  I am fine with breaking up
> > submission,
> > even though the RDMA driver would be dependent upon the virtual bus and
> > LAN
> > driver changes.
> If I said that I ment a single pull request *to RDMA* with Dave's acks
> on the net side, not a single pull request to net.
> Given the growth of the net side changes this may be better to use a
> shared branch methodology.

I am open to any suggestions you have on submitting these changes that has
the least amount of thrash for all the maintainers involved.

My concerns for submitting the network driver changes to the RDMA tree is
that it will cause David Miller a headache when taking additional LAN
driver changes that would be affected by the changes that were taken into
the RDMA tree.

We can hash this out later if need be, since it is clear there are changes
needed to the current series.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists