linux-kernel - Re: Why do we need reset_control_get

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:29:42 +0200
From:   Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Why do we need reset_control_get_optional() ?

Am Dienstag, den 16.08.2016, 18:41 +0900 schrieb Masahiro Yamada:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> 2016-08-06 0:35 GMT+09:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
> 
> >
> > config RESET_FOO
> >         bool "FOO reset controller" if COMPILE_TEST && !ARCH_FOO
> >         default ARCH_FOO
> >
> > then I think we get both: you won't be able to turn it off
> > but also get the build testing.
>
> This looks good to me, too.
> I do not know if we need "&& !ARCH_FOO", though.
> 
> When we are compile-testing, we do not care if it works on run-time,
> so perhaps it makes sense to allow to enable/disable RESET_FOO
> regardless ARCH_FOO.

I'll send a few patches to add the Kconfig symbols. Turning around the
RESET_CONTROLLER selection can be done in a second step.

regards
Philipp