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:   Sun, 26 Jan 2020 11:29:50 +0000
From:   Michal Kalderon <>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <>
CC:     Ariel Elior <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 net-next 00/13] qed*: Utilize FW

> From: <linux-rdma-
>> On Behalf Of Jakub Kicinski
> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 7:16 PM
> To: Michal Kalderon <>
> Cc: Ariel Elior <>;;
>;; linux-
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 00/13] qed*: Utilize FW
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:58:23 +0200, Michal Kalderon wrote:
> > Changes from V1
> > ---------------
> > - Remove epoch + kernel version from device debug dump
> > - don't bump driver version
> But you haven't fixed the fact that in patch 1 you already strat changing
> defines for the new FW version, even though the version is only enforced
> (reportedly) in patch 9?
Right, I'll move the version change to patch #1 in V3. 

However,  the entire series is required (except a few patches not prefixed with FW ) to be
taken to work correctly with the FW.
Our FW is not backward/forward compatible. I have mentioned this in the cover letter, the split into smaller patches and prefix with
FW is to ease review and was done due to previous feedback that it is very difficult to review the FW patches:

I am fine with squashing all the patches that are required to working with FW8.42.2.0 into one single patch if that is required and acceptable,
But I believe that would make reviewing the changes more difficult.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists