> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org] > Sent: den 5 juni 2018 12:50 > To: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerst...@axis.com>; Hong Liu > <hongl.f...@cn.fujitsu.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] [PATCH] wpa-supplicant: fix the bug for > PATCHTOOL = "patch" > > On Tue, 2018-06-05 at 10:43 +0000, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org > > > [mailto:openembedded-core-boun...@lists.openembedded.org] On Behalf > > > Of > > > Hong Liu > > > Sent: den 5 juni 2018 10:11 > > > To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > > > Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH] [PATCH] wpa-supplicant: fix the bug for > > > PATCHTOOL = "patch" > > > > > > When switch PATCHTOOL to patch, applying 'key-replay-cve- > > > multiple.patch' failed: > > > > > > checking file src/ap/ieee802_11.c > > > checking file src/ap/wpa_auth.c > > > checking file src/ap/wpa_auth.h > > > checking file src/ap/wpa_auth_ft.c > > > checking file src/ap/wpa_auth_i.h > > > checking file src/common/wpa_common.h > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa.c > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa_i.h > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa.c > > > Hunk #1 FAILED at 709. > > > Hunk #2 FAILED at 757. > > > Hunk #3 succeeded at 840 (offset -12 lines). > > > Hunk #4 FAILED at 868. > > > Hunk #5 FAILED at 900. > > > Hunk #6 FAILED at 924. > > > Hunk #7 succeeded at 1536 (offset -38 lines). > > > Hunk #8 FAILED at 2386. > > > Hunk #9 FAILED at 2920. > > > Hunk #10 succeeded at 2940 (offset -46 lines). > > > Hunk #11 FAILED at 2998. > > > 8 out of 11 hunks FAILED > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa_i.h > > > Hunk #1 FAILED at 32. > > > 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED > > > checking file src/common/wpa_common.h > > > Hunk #1 succeeded at 215 with fuzz 1. > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa.c > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa_i.h > > > checking file src/ap/wpa_auth.c > > > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1898 (offset -3 lines). > > > Hunk #2 succeeded at 2470 (offset -3 lines). > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/tdls.c > > > checking file wpa_supplicant/wnm_sta.c > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa.c > > > Hunk #1 succeeded at 2378 (offset -62 lines). > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa_ft.c > > > checking file src/rsn_supp/wpa_i.h > > > Hunk #1 succeeded at 123 (offset -5 lines). > > > > > > So split the wpa-supplicant/key-replay-cve-multiple to 8 patches. > > > > Why does it need to be split into eight separate patches? Isn't it > > just a case of having to regenerate the patch so that the hunk > > contexts match the current code? > > You're technically right but I think separate patches may be a lot > clearer... > > Cheers, > > Richard
I should probably have looked at the patches and not just the new file names. I just assumed the original patch was split along the file borders, but I now see that it was actually split according to functionality. However, it might be an idea to let git format-patch regenerate the file names to better indicate their contents. //Peter -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
