netdev - Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] bus: mhi: Add mhi_queue_is

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 06 Nov 2020 21:58:12 +0530
From:   Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        bbhatt@...eaurora.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com,
        jhugo@...eaurora.org, hemantk@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] bus: mhi: Add mhi_queue_is_full function



On 6 November 2020 9:34:45 PM IST, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 10:43:53 +0530 Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 04:57:08PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> > On Tue,  3 Nov 2020 18:23:53 +0100 Loic Poulain wrote:  
>> > > This function can be used by client driver to determine whether
>it's
>> > > possible to queue new elements in a channel ring.
>> > > 
>> > > Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>
>> > > Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam
><manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>  
>> > 
>> > Applied.  
>> 
>> Oops. I should've mentioned this (my bad) that we should use an
>immutable
>> branch to take this change. Because, there are changes going to get
>merged
>> into the MHI tree which will introduce merge conflicts. And moreover,
>we
>> planned to have an immutable branch to handle a similar case with
>ath11k.
>
>Damn, sorry.
>
>> Since you've applied now, what would you propose?
>
>Do you need mhi_queue_is_full() in other branches, or are you just
>concerned about the conflicts?
>

Yes, I need this patch in mhi-next.

>I'm assuming the concern is just about the mhi/core patch, or would 
>you need to refactor something in the net driver as well?

Just the mhi_queue_is_full() patch. 

Thanks, 
Mani

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.