netdev - Re: [PATCH v21 02/23] cxl/mem: Arrange for always-synchronous memdev attach

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]

Message-ID: <692e7324a4ddc_261c1100d8@dwillia2-mobl4.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 21:03:32 -0800
From: <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: <alejandro.lucero-palau@....com>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <edward.cree@....com>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, <dave.jiang@...el.com>
CC: Alejandro Lucero <alucerop@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 02/23] cxl/mem: Arrange for always-synchronous memdev
 attach

alejandro.lucero-palau@ wrote:
> From: Alejandro Lucero <alucerop@....com>
> 
> In preparation for CXL accelerator drivers that have a hard dependency on
> CXL capability initialization, arrange for the endpoint probe result to be
> conveyed to the caller of devm_cxl_add_memdev().
> 
> As it stands cxl_pci does not care about the attach state of the cxl_memdev
> because all generic memory expansion functionality can be handled by the
> cxl_core. For accelerators, that driver needs to know perform driver
> specific initialization if CXL is available, or exectute a fallback to PCIe
> only operation.
> 
> By moving devm_cxl_add_memdev() to cxl_mem.ko it removes async module
> loading as one reason that a memdev may not be attached upon return from
> devm_cxl_add_memdev().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>

No, there, is no such thing as non-author sign-offs without
Co-developed-by. If you take authorship and take most of the changelog
text verbatim then either be clear about what additional changes you
made to take authorship, or leave the original authorship in tact.

For this patch we can just drop it because the simpler proposal I
replied to patch1 seems a better way to go.