netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] ptp: clockmatrix: Remove IDT references or replace with Renesas.

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:   Wed, 18 Dec 2019 14:45:09 +0000
From:   Vincent Cheng <vincent.cheng.xh@...esas.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "richardcochran@...il.com" <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] ptp: clockmatrix: Remove IDT references or
 replace with Renesas.

On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 01:29:56AM EST, David Miller wrote:
>From: vincent.cheng.xh@...esas.com
>Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:03:07 -0500
>
>> From: Vincent Cheng <vincent.cheng.xh@...esas.com>
>> 
>> Renesas Electronics Corporation completed acquisition of IDT in 2019.
>> 
>> This patch removes IDT references or replaces IDT with Renesas.
>> Renamed idt8a340_reg.h to clockmatrix_reg.h.
>> There were no functional changes.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Cheng <vincent.cheng.xh@...esas.com>
>
>Sorry, we don't do stuff like this.
>
>The driver shall keep the reference to it's old vendor name, and
>this is how we've handled similar situations in the past.

Sorry, was not aware.

>And do you know the worst part about this?  You DID in fact
>functionally change this driver:
>
>> -#define FW_FILENAME	"idtcm.bin"
>> +#define FW_FILENAME	"cm_tcs.bin"
>
>Now everyone would have missing firmware.
>
>So not only is this unacceptable on precedence grounds, and how we
>always handle situations like this, it's functionally wrong and would
>break things for users.
>
>Please remove this patch and resubmit #1 and #3 as a series for
>re-review.

What is the proper way to remove a patch submission?

Regards,
Vincent