linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 8250: make probing for TXEN bug a config option

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:	Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:41:53 -0800
From:	"Vitaly Wool" <vitalywool@...il.com>
To:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 8250: make probing for TXEN bug a config option

On 2/14/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:37:52 +0300 "Vitaly Wool" <vitalywool@...il.com> wrote:
> > Hmm, why? I can't think of a platform where one 8250-compatible UART is
> > problematic and another isn't :)
> >
>
> Is it not possible that the same kernel package can be installed on systems
> which do and don't need this feature?  If so, we don't want to force the
> provider of that package to create two packages.
>
> That, plus the chances of the package creator actually knowing about this
> option aren't great.
>
> Generally, if it can be done at runtime it is better to do so, no?

Okay, yes, I see your point. The same kernel might actually be
supporting several machines.

But having that as a config option doesn't look too attractive to me.
What about adding a new flag to plat_serial 8250 stuff instead?

Vitaly
-
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/