netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v9 00/10] Create common DPLL configuration API

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: Fri, 23 Jun 2023 08:53:36 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>, vadfed@...a.com,
 jonathan.lemon@...il.com, pabeni@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
 davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, vadfed@...com,
 jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, saeedm@...dia.com,
 leon@...nel.org, richardcochran@...il.com, sj@...nel.org,
 javierm@...hat.com, ricardo.canuelo@...labora.com, mst@...hat.com,
 tzimmermann@...e.de, michal.michalik@...el.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
 jacek.lawrynowicz@...ux.intel.com, airlied@...hat.com, ogabbay@...nel.org,
 arnd@...db.de, nipun.gupta@....com, axboe@...nel.dk, linux@...y.sk,
 masahiroy@...nel.org, benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com,
 geert+renesas@...der.be, milena.olech@...el.com, kuniyu@...zon.com,
 liuhangbin@...il.com, hkallweit1@...il.com, andy.ren@...cruise.com,
 razor@...ckwall.org, idosch@...dia.com, lucien.xin@...il.com,
 nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, phil@....cc, claudiajkang@...il.com,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
 linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 poros@...hat.com, mschmidt@...hat.com, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
 vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 00/10] Create common DPLL configuration API

On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 17:19:11 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> I don't understand. The discussion in the RFCv8 thread is still going
> on. The things I mentioned there are ignored. Like for example:
> 1) mode_set op removal
> 2) odd ice dpll locking scheme (either fix or describe why it is ok -
> 				that's the unfinished discussion)
> 3) header file bits squash I suggested. Vadim wrote that it sounds
>    reasonable, yet nothing changed
> 
> I thought we are past this. Why I have to point the same issues over and
> over?

FWIW I'm lost in the previous thread, so for me there's value in
refreshing the series.

But you're right, at the very least there should be a summary of
outstanding issues / open items / ongoing discussions in the cover
letter.