linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: iron out include ladder mistakes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdYgEp2qb6_TWukLZmaO-tKz=hg_2=FAQk9E1DbP5wiP1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 8 Nov 2012 13:58:53 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim@...com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	Anmar Oueja <anmar.oueja@...aro.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: iron out include ladder mistakes

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org> wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 09:21 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:

>> And we need to keep the static inlines in <linux/gpio.h>
>> but here for the !CONFIG_GENERIC_GPIO case, and then we
>> may as well throw in a few warnings like the other
>> prototypes there, if someone would have the bad taste
>> of compiling without GENERIC_GPIO even.
>
> Hmm. Is there way to avoid the duplication of the dummy implementations?
> Having a prototype and a truly dummy implementation in one place, but a
> WARNing/failing dummy implementation elsewhere, seems like it'll cause
> issues.

Yeah :-/

This is not exactly elegant and is some side effect of the split
between CONFIG_GENERIC_GPIO and CONFIG_GPIOLIB,
the real fix is to get rid of all GENERIC_GPIO implementations
in the kernel and switch everyone over to GPIOLIB.

Not that easy though :-( can't think of any nice fix.

> Does this patch mean the previous series causes "git bisect" failures?

Yeah once I have something that doesn't break x86 I might
just squash collapse all of this into the gpioranges patch.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/