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
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
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
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.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
L
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
