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  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, 8 Dec 2020 10:18:49 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Mario Limonciello <Mario.Limonciello@...l.com>
Cc:     Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
        intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
        Sasha Netfin <sasha.neftin@...el.com>,
        Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>,
        Stefan Assmann <sassmann@...hat.com>, darcari@...hat.com,
        Yijun.Shen@...l.com, Perry.Yuan@...l.com,
        anthony.wong@...onical.com,
        Vitaly Lifshits <vitaly.lifshits@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] e1000e: fix S0ix flow to allow S0i3.2 subset
 entry

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 11:24:17 -0600 Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 12/4/20 2:09 PM, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> > From: Vitaly Lifshits <vitaly.lifshits@...el.com>
> >
> > Changed a configuration in the flows to align with
> > architecture requirements to achieve S0i3.2 substate.
> >
> > Also fixed a typo in the previous commit 632fbd5eb5b0
> > ("e1000e: fix S0ix flows for cable connected case").
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vitaly Lifshits <vitaly.lifshits@...el.com>
> > Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 8 ++++----
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)  
> 
> I realize that the series is still under discussion, but I intentionally 
> moved this
> patch to the front of the series so it can be pulled in even if the 
> others are still
> discussed.
> 
> @David Miller:
> This particular patch is more important than the rest.  It actually 
> fixes issues
> on the non-ME i219V as well.  Can this one be queued up and we can keep
> discussing the rest?

Not sure Dave will notice this discussion, best if you repost this patch
separately. If it's a fix that should be backported to stable make sure
you add a Fixes tag.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists