linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V7 08/11] ACPI: always register memory hotplug scan handler even if CONFIG_X86_INTEL

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]

Date:	Mon, 26 May 2014 15:58:59 +0300
From:	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
	matthew.garrett@...ula.com, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
	dmitry.torokhov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 08/11] ACPI: always register memory hotplug scan
 handler even if CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS is cleared

On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 02:40:58PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, May 26, 2014 02:52:35 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 01:53:39PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > I'm wondering whether it is worth the ugliness to get platform bus
> > > > enumeration the default?
> > > > 
> > > > Since you already have the PNP whitelist, can't we just use that for PNP
> > > > and keep these files as they are? In other words, don't make any kind of
> > > > physical device by default and let the scan handlers to decide.
> > > 
> > > Well, that's tempting, but then we'd get one more whitelist pretty much without
> > > any benefit, because we'd be still going to have the list in acpi_platform.c.
> > > 
> > > The purpose of the whole exercise is not to prevent PNP devices from being
> > > created by default (which admittedly is a nice side effect), but to get rid
> > > of the white list in acpi_platform.c - and in particular, to avoid the
> > > necessity to add every ACPI-enumerated platform device to that list in the
> > > future.
> > 
> > Yes, I understand but that list currently has only 5 entries. Are
> > we expecting to have much more entries there in the future?
> 
> Yes, we are.  Pretty much anything that's DT-enumerable today may be
> ACPI-enumerable in the future.  But you should know that. ;-)

OK. Then I guess having platform enumeration the default makes sense and
we just need to live with the ugly #ifdefs in acpi_lpss.c.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/