linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 (x64 thermal build failure)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080220082133.56f93d27@crazy>
Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:21:33 +0100
From:	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, len.brown@...el.com,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, michael@...e-electrons.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc2-mm1 (x64 thermal build failure)

Le Tue, 19 Feb 2008 15:21:29 -0800,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> a écrit :

> ug, sorry, if I'd realised it was like this I'd have said "don't
> bother". Apart from the obvious problem, this means that people will
> keep breaking CONFIG_DMI=n all the time, because they will forget the
> ifdefs, and the number of people who test with CONFIG_DMI=n will be
> small.

Yes, #ifdef CONFIG_DMI is not very comfortable. That why I proposed
things such as DECLARE_DMI_FIXUP_TABLE(), because it would force people
to use these macros, which would then be working correctly depending on
DMI=y/n. However, there's still the issue of driver_data that I
mentionned in my earlier post.

What should I do ? Option 1 ? Option 2 ? Give up with the patch ?

Thanks for your comments,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Free Embedded Linux Training Materials
on http://free-electrons.com/training
(More than 1500 pages!)

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)