linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] remove support for AVR32 architecture

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, 6 Mar 2017 20:07:19 +0100
From:   Hans-Christian Noren Egtvedt <egtvedt@...fundet.no>
To:     Håvard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] remove support for AVR32 architecture

Around Sun 05 Mar 2017 21:58:16 -0800 or thereabout, Håvard Skinnemoen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Hans-Christian Noren Egtvedt
> <egtvedt@...fundet.no> wrote:
>> I have prepared three patches in my for-linus branch in git tree
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/egtvedt/linux-avr32.git
> 
> Acked-by: Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...il.com>
> 
> Thank you for keeping it alive for so long!
> 
> I looked through you tree superficially. There are a few references to
> AVR32 remaining. Most of them are for other subsystems, but you could
> consider picking up a couple of more for your patchset:
> 
> include/uapi/linux/elf-em.h still defines EM_AVR32. This could be
> considered a part of the architecture code.

My git grep magic did not catch this.

> lib/Kconfig.debug has a list of architectures which want frame
> pointers. You could probably remove AVR32 from that list.

Same.

Will add a patch for these two.

> mm/Kconfig has a special case for AVR32 needing two quicklists.
>

This one I have in a different series, the one I planned to push to various
maintainers after the initial removal.

> If you were planning to patch each of those separately later, please
> ignore my comments.

Partly (-:

-- 
mvh
Hans-Christian Noren Egtvedt