On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
>>
>> While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
>> incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
>> This is possible since only the
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
>
> While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
> incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
> This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
> mandatory and the rest are
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
mandatory and the rest are optional.
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 01:51:50PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
> Bjorn Helgaas writes:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
> >>
> >> While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
> >> incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:39:36AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 16:45 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
> > >
> > > While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
> > > incorrect values if the
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:39:36AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 16:45 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 01:51:50PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com writes:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a
Bjorn Helgaas writes:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
>>
>> While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
>> incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
>> This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
>>
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 16:45 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
> >
> > While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
> > incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
> > This is possible since only
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 16:45 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since only the device
Bjorn Helgaas bhelg...@google.com writes:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since only the device and vendor
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
>
> While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
> incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
> This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
> mandatory and the rest are
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 09:32:59PM -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
mandatory and the rest are optional.
On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 21:32 -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
> While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
> incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
> This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
> mandatory and the rest are optional. As a
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
mandatory and the rest are optional. As a result, store_new_id
will fill in default values that are
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
mandatory and the rest are optional. As a result, store_new_id
will fill in default values that are
On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 21:32 -0400, Bandan Das wrote:
While using the new_id interface, the user can unintentionally feed
incorrect values if the driver static table has a matching entry.
This is possible since only the device and vendor fields are
mandatory and the rest are optional. As a
18 matches
Mail list logo
