linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: SoC fixes for 3.12-rc

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: <CAOesGMg3EPrEcaJ4cqhCzK+54CNXa+xN3gEMoBnsBmgW67DKHA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:12:42 -0700
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	"Woodhouse, David" <david.woodhouse@...el.com>
Cc:	"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"arm@...nel.org" <arm@...nel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"computersforpeace@...il.com" <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: SoC fixes for 3.12-rc

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Woodhouse, David
<david.woodhouse@...el.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-09-19 at 12:47 -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>
>> - A fix for build breakage in the MTD subsystem for some PXA devices.
>>   David Woodhouse has this patch in his for-next branch but has not been
>>   responding to our requests to send it up so here it is.
>>   I should have amended the commit message to describe the build failure for
>>   CONFIG_OF=n setups, but forgot and now it's down in the stack of commits.
>
> Thanks for pulling that in. Apologies for the screwup.

No worries. You're a busy guy these days.

> We were were working on a better way to fix the litter of #ifdef
> CONFIG_OF which wasn't ready for the merge window so I just left this
> one out since it *appeared* to be entirely cosmetic.

Yeah, the real bug is a missing stub function in the #else case, but
if the ifdef is all going away there's no point in adding it.

The ifdeffery around the match tables is something that Mark Brown
brought up yesterday as well. With ACPI_PTR() and of_match_ptr() we at
least don't need the ifdefs in the struct device, but we do still need
it for the match tables.


-Olof
--
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/