linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] spi: octeon: Add thunderx driver

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, 25 Jul 2016 09:31:15 -0700
From:	David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Jan Glauber <jan.glauber@...iumnetworks.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Steven J. Hill" <steven.hill@...ium.com>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] spi: octeon: Add thunderx driver

On 07/25/2016 09:16 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 05:51:22PM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 10:04:52PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 12:42:55PM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote:
>
>>>> +	depends on 64BIT && PCI && !CAVIUM_OCTEON_SOC
>
>>> This is a *weird* and most likely broken set of dependencies - why
>>> exclude this if we're on Octeon (or Octeon happens to have been enabled
>>> in a config)?
>
>> I agree that it looks weird, the reasoning is that we would like
>> to avoid making the driver depend on something like ARCH_THUNDER.
>
> Why?
>
>> So I made the driver depend on the things it actually uses
>> (PCI for probing and 64BIT because of readq/writeq) and don't care if it
>> compiles on other platforms too (like x86).
>
> The usual pattern would be something like (ARCH_THUNDER || COMPILE_TEST)
> && PCI && 64BIT (so that people on other platforms where the device will
> never actually appear don't get bothered by the prompt).

ARCH_THUNDER needs to die, so perhaps it should be (ARM64 || 
COMPILE_TEST) && PCI && 64BIT if you really want to hide it from 
non-arm64 kernel configs.


>
>> That said, I can remove the !CAVIUM_OCTEON_SOC, it compiles without
>> errors on MIPS too. Would that be ok?
>
> Sure.
>