netdev - RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] net: mvpp2: disable force link UP during port init procedure

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:   Thu, 17 Dec 2020 11:26:17 +0000
From:   Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>
CC:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>,
        Yan Markman <ymarkman@...vell.com>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] net: mvpp2: disable force link UP
 during port init procedure

> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:00:49PM +0100, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> > Hi Stefan,
> >
> > czw., 17 gru 2020 o 10:42 <stefanc@...vell.com> napisał(a):
> > >
> > > From: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
> > >
> > > Force link UP can be enabled by bootloader during tftpboot and
> > > breaks NFS support.
> > > Force link UP disabled during port init procedure.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
> > > ---
> >
> > What are the updates against v1? Please note them in this place for
> > individual patches and list all in the cover letter (in case sending a
> > group of patches).
> 
> It seems the only reason this has been resent is because it's
> (incorrectly) part of a series that involved a change to patch 1 (adding the
> Fixes: tag).
> 
> As this is a stand-alone fix, it shouldn't be part of a series unless there really is
> some kind of dependency with the other patch(es) of that series.

I would repost this two patches separately.

Regards,
Stefan.