linux-kernel - Re: MMC: Make the configuration memory resource optional

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, 29 Jul 2009 14:11:52 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Ian Molton <ian@...menth.co.uk>
Cc:	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pierre Ossman <drzeus@...eus.cx>,
	Magnus Damm <damm@...nsource.se>
Subject: Re: MMC: Make the configuration memory resource optional

On 29 Jul 2009, at 13:58, Ian Molton <ian@...menth.co.uk> wrote:

> Magnus Damm wrote:
>
>>> Indeed.  It's actually much worse than you say, each individual ARM
>>> architecture has its own clock API implementation of varying  
>>> quality and
>>> of course there are architectures that don't do the clock API at  
>>> all.
>> Yeah. This is exactly why I don't want to block on the clocklib  
>> implementation.
>
> Yeah, good idea... lets ignore the problem until its so big we cant  
> fix it at all...

The problem here is sufficiently substantial that I'd be impressed if  
we managed to get a good solution in within a single kernel release.  
This does help encourage people to keep local hacks but those are much  
more realistic.
--
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/