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]
Date:	Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:31:12 +0100
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Sangbeom Kim <sbkim73@...sung.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/28] Remove MACH_SMDKC210

On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 11:41 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 07:47:52PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Please fix whatever script you're using to generate your mails, it's
> generating corrupt headers.

I think Richard's mail didn't end up on lkml. But it's pretty clear what
it must have looked like.

> >  config SND_SOC_SAMSUNG_SMDK_WM9713
> >  	tristate "SoC AC97 Audio support for SMDK with WM9713"
> > -	depends on SND_SOC_SAMSUNG && (MACH_SMDK6410 || MACH_SMDKC100 || MACH_SMDKV210 || MACH_SMDKC110 || MACH_SMDKV310 || MACH_SMDKC210)
> > +	depends on SND_SOC_SAMSUNG && (MACH_SMDK6410 || MACH_SMDKC100 || MACH_SMDKV210 || MACH_SMDKC110 || MACH_SMDKV310)
> 
> Like I said to Paul this isn't fixing the actual issue - think about why
> the symbol was there in the first place and why it was removed.  There
> is a problem here but this would make it less likely that it would be
> properly fixed.

Would you mind going through this one step at a time, just to make sure
_I_ understand what it is that you'd like to see?

If so, to be absolutely sure we start from the same point: do you agree
that the above line now effectively reads
    depends on SND_SOC_SAMSUNG && (MACH_SMDK6410 || MACH_SMDKC100 || MACH_SMDKV210 || MACH_SMDKC110 || false || false)

because there's neither a Kconfig symbol MACH_SMDKV310 nor a Kconfig
symbol MACH_SMDKC210?


Paul Bolle

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ