| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 10:00:15 +0200 From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next-2021-12-07 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> writes: > On Tue, 7 Dec 2021 14:42:11 +0000 (UTC) Kalle Valo wrote: >> here's a pull request to net-next tree, more info below. Please let me know if >> there are any problems. > > Pulled, thanks! Could you chase the appropriate people so that the new > W=1 C=1 warnings get resolved before the merge window's here? > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20211207144211.A9949C341C1@smtp.kernel.org/ Just so that I understand right, you are referring to this patchwork test: Errors and warnings before: 111 this patch: 115 https://patchwork.hopto.org/static/nipa/591659/12662005/build_32bit/ And you want the four new warnings to be fixed? That can be quite time consuming, to be honest I would rather revert the commits than using a lot of my time trying to get people fix the warnings. Is there an easy way to find what are the new warnings? But in the big picture are you saying the net trees now have a rule that no new W=1 and C=1 warnings are allowed? I do test ath10k and ath11k drivers for W=1 and C=1 warnings, but all other drivers are on their own in this regard. At the moment I have no tooling in place to check all wireless drivers. -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Powered by blists - more mailing lists