linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: kconfig exposing unbuildable 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:	Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:06:14 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Randy Dunlap <RANDY.DUNLAP@...CLE.COM>
To:	"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: kconfig exposing unbuildable driver


--- Original Message --- (from rmk:)
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:47:18PM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Russell King wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:38:28PM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Russell King wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > That was my initial approach as well, which got shot down by Andrew
> > > > > Morton and others as being unacceptable.
> > > > 
> > > > where?
> > > 
> > > In private mail.
> > > 
> > > > why?
> > > 
> > > Well, first I need to gain the permission of Andrew to post his private
> > > message.  I'm not being subborn here - I _do_ _not_ reproduce private
> > > messages in public without prior permission.
> > 
> > Sure, understood.
> > 
> > > > Seems like we need to push back on that part.
> > > 
> > > Talk to Andrew then.
> > 
> > He is cc-ed (although traveling much this week IIRC).
> 
> In which case, since it's likely I won't get a reply in the
> next hour
> (which'll delay my response by 24 hours) let me paraphrase
> what Andrew said.
> 
> Andrew believes that it is beneficial to have other architectures,
> particularly x86, build other architectures drivers.

Sure.

> Meanwhile, pHilipp Zabel believes this hardware not to be ARM
> specific.

That's the big Important missing info.  So the source file is
incorrect, not the Kconfig.l

> So, the majority concensus in the three way discussion was
> that it
> should remain visible, and the (unnecessary) include and its
> dependents be removed.
> 
> Having now had some time (read: half an hour after dinner after
> getting
> back home) to investigate, I can point to the patch in several
> places:
> 
>   http://ftp.arm.linux.org.uk/pub/armlinux/kernel/git-cur/arm:devel.mbox
> 
> and find the patch with subject line:
> 
>   [ARM] 5010/1: htc-pasic3: remove unused defines and includes
> 
> or grab 5010/1 from my patch system.  If you want a patch to
> plaster over it, merging that would be a far better solution.

OK, sounds fair.  Thanks.

~Randy

--
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/