Le 09/18/15 02:46, Russell King - ARM Linux a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> While looking at the phy code, I identified a number of weaknesses
> where refcounting on device structures was being leaked, where
> modules could be removed while in-use, and where the fixed-phy could
> end up having unintended cons
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 08:01:28AM -0700, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> On Fri, 2015-09-18 at 10:56AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > Sorry guys, some of you will get the patches twice, as Sören's name
> > in the header caused vger to reject all the patches.
>
> That is the
Hi Russell,
On Fri, 2015-09-18 at 10:56AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Sorry guys, some of you will get the patches twice, as Sören's name
> in the header caused vger to reject all the patches.
That is the first time I hear about an issue like that. I've been
receiving patches fine th
Sorry guys, some of you will get the patches twice, as Sören's name
in the header caused vger to reject all the patches.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the
Hi,
While looking at the phy code, I identified a number of weaknesses
where refcounting on device structures was being leaked, where
modules could be removed while in-use, and where the fixed-phy could
end up having unintended consequences caused by incorrect calls to
fixed_phy_update_state().
T
