linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG

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]

Message-ID: <AANLkTikw7j5Q7CGZK=Xbcgubt9LYBGiXf01wQ4nbg8NR@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 7 Feb 2011 16:00:55 +0100
From:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org,
	ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 15:50, Mark Brown
<broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 01:44:32AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:18:29 +0000 Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
>
>> > Do you mean that these systems require CONFIG_PM be turned off, or just
>> > that people tend not to turn it on?  If the latter would you expect any
>> > ill effects from doing so?
>
>> I don't know the answer to either question without testing.  All I am
>> saying is that currently the default for CONFIG_PM is "off" and you are
>> changing it to be "on" and there may not have been any testing done of
>> that in some situations.   We don't know where it was explicitly
>> turned off any more since we shrank our defconfig files (which was done
>> automatically) ... since it is off by default, it doesn't need to be
>> mentioned in a defconfig unless it needs to be turned on.
>
> My suspicion would be that it'll have been turned off by someone hitting
> return through a config upgrade rather than through deliberate effort.
> On the other hand if it is essential for some machines to have it
> disabled they probably want to have somethnig in Kconfig.

$ git grep "CONFIG_PM is not set"
7cf3d73b4360e91b14326632ab1aeda4cb26308d^ -- arch/ | wc -l
256
$

7cf3d73b4360e91b14326632ab1aeda4cb26308d is the commit that introduced
savedefconfig, so that's a safe revision with untrimmed defconfigs.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds
--
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/