linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: wm5110: Give new AIF2 registers defaults and mark as readable

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: <20131127182841.GF14725@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 27 Nov 2013 18:28:41 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	sameo@...ux.intel.com, patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: wm5110: Give new AIF2 registers defaults and mark
 as readable

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 04:42:02PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:

> I see. Well I'm not sure how. If we apply it to either ASoC or MFD and
> other patches pertaining to that file subsequently appear, then
> conflict is likely. As you know, the commonly used mitigation

It shouldn't be that likely, we're adding entries to the middle of big,
ordered tables - conflicts would be caused by something like changing
or adding adjacent entries and they're pretty trivial to resolve.  It's
not like a restructring of the code or anything.

> technique we usually employ is immutable branches, but this was not
> employed in this case for one reason or another. So if we apply it now
> to either one of the trees we will be hedging our bets.

Hedging our bets would be applying it to both trees!  

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)