netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: sched: make the watchdog functions more coherent

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <24d3d43f-8b69-c4e1-9c42-89202705c542@longchamp.me>
Date:   Fri, 5 Jun 2020 06:52:47 +0200
From:   Valentin Longchamp <valentin@...gchamp.me>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...nulli.us, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
        jhs@...atatu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sched: make the watchdog functions more coherent

Le 05.06.2020 à 00:55, David Miller a écrit :
> From: Valentin Longchamp <valentin@...gchamp.me>
> Date: Wed,  3 Jun 2020 23:21:13 +0200
> 
>> Remove dev_watchdog_up() that directly called __netdev_watchdog_up() and
>> rename dev_watchdog_down() to __netdev_watchdog_down() for symmetry.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Valentin Longchamp <valentin@...gchamp.me>
>> ---
>>   net/sched/sch_generic.c | 11 +++--------
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/sched/sch_generic.c b/net/sched/sch_generic.c
>> index 2efd5b61acef..f3cb740a2941 100644
>> --- a/net/sched/sch_generic.c
>> +++ b/net/sched/sch_generic.c
>> @@ -465,12 +465,7 @@ void __netdev_watchdog_up(struct net_device *dev)
>>   	}
>>   }
>>   
>> -static void dev_watchdog_up(struct net_device *dev)
>> -{
>> -	__netdev_watchdog_up(dev);
>> -}
>> -
>> -static void dev_watchdog_down(struct net_device *dev)
>> +static void __netdev_watchdog_down(struct net_device *dev)
> 
> This patch will not apply if I apply your symbol export patch because
> the context above this function will be different.
> 
> Please don't do this.
> 

Yeah, I didn't know how to handle this properly: I kept both patches 
separated because the symbol export should go to stable and this one not.

Is that OK to have only a ("initial") subset of a series aimed for stable ?