linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: BCM1480: remove checks for CONFIG_SIBYTE_BCM1480

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]

Date:	Thu, 22 May 2014 15:36:35 +0200
From:	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
To:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc:	linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: BCM1480: remove checks for
 CONFIG_SIBYTE_BCM1480_PROF

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:24:19AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:

> There are two checks for CONFIG_SIBYTE_BCM1480_PROF in the tree since
> v2.6.15. The related Kconfig symbol has never been added to the tree. So
> these checks have always evaluated to false. Besides, one of these
> checks guards a call of sbprof_cpu_intr(). But that function is not
> defined. Remove all this.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
> ---
> Untested.
> 
> Until v2.6.23 there also were checks for CONFIG_SIBYTE_SB1250_PROF in
> the tree. There also was a Kconfig symbol SIBYTE_SB1250_PROF so it was
> possible to make these checks evaluate to true. But, since one of these
> checks also guarded a call of sbprof_cpu_intr(), that should have made
> the build fail with an error.

The Sibyte profiling was far inferior to later solutions such as oprofile
or perf and non-standard anyway.  So let's kill what's left over.

  Ralf
--
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/