netdev - Re: [PATCH wpan-next v4 05/11] Revert "at86rf230: add debugfs support"

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:   Sun, 27 Mar 2022 11:36:59 -0400
From:   Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>,
        linux-wpan - ML <linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Girault <david.girault@...vo.com>,
        Romuald Despres <romuald.despres@...vo.com>,
        Frederic Blain <frederic.blain@...vo.com>,
        Nicolas Schodet <nico@...fr.eu.org>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH wpan-next v4 05/11] Revert "at86rf230: add debugfs support"

Hi,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 2:56 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
>
> This reverts commit 493bc90a96839ffde5e6216c62c025d2f9e6efc3.
>
> This commit was introduced because of some testing capabilities
> involving ack handling. Not we want to collect errors so let's first
> revert this commit, then right after reintroduce the Tx trac handling
> which is the only one that makes sense for now.
>
> Suggested-by: Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>

I didn't want to have a revert of the commit or... yes I wanted but
not in such a way as `git revert...`, just that the whole debug
feature is dropped (which was introduced by a commit) because you
implemented a real first use case to make something with those values
now and do not leave a half of the debug feature upstream.

Nevertheless it's okay, this way will do it as well...

- Alex