linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] AT91: add AT91SAM9X5 dummy configuration variable

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: <20110629093033.GB2760@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Jun 2011 12:30:34 +0300
From:	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
To:	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>
Cc:	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	avictor.za@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] AT91: add AT91SAM9X5 dummy configuration variable

Hi,

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 06:02:52PM +0200, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > yet you will prevent the driver from being easily used by other
> > architectures. What will happen is that a certain amount of:
> > 
> > depends on (ARCH_AT91SAM9X5 || ARCH_FOO || ARCH_BAR || ARCH_BAZ)
> no I disagree this is done to allow only the drivers on proper arch
> 
> and we do not need the multiple depend we usally create a HAVE_xxx config
> that the ARCH select and we just depend on it

I still think it isn't good enough. Ideally, drivers will always be
portable without any arch dependency or the HAVE_XXX trick. Still, it's
not worth to continue this discussion, I rather look at a driver which
now depends on ARCH_AT91SAM9X5.

-- 
balbi

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (491 bytes)