linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 16/17] powerpc/e500: Make __setup_cpu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <45E2D05B-B8B9-4254-910C-F24757C59A22@kernel.crashing.org>
Date:	Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:52:36 -0600
From:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
Cc:	Kyle Moffett <Kyle.D.Moffett@...ing.com>,
	<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Baruch Siach <baruch@...s.co.il>,
	Timur Tabi <B04825@...escale.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexandre Bounine <alexandre.bounine@....com>,
	Shaohui Xie <b21989@...escale.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 16/17] powerpc/e500: Make __setup_cpu_{e200,e500,e500mc,e5500} optional


On Nov 10, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Scott Wood wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 07:07:14PM -0500, Kyle Moffett wrote:
>> Only build the setup functions when the corresponding entries are
>> included in the CPU table.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Kyle Moffett <Kyle.D.Moffett@...ing.com>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S |   14 +++++++++++++-
>> 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S
>> index 8053db0..77721b2 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S
>> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
>> #include <asm/cputable.h>
>> #include <asm/ppc_asm.h>
>> 
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_FSL_E500_V1_V2) || defined(CONFIG_FSL_E500MC) \
>> +		|| defined(CONFIG_FSL_E5500)
> 
> This seems like the kind of thing that CONFIG_E500 should be retained
> for.
> 
> -Scott

Agreed, we should define CONFIG_E500 as internal and used for common functionality between E500, E500MC, E5500, E6500.

- k--
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/