linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: m8xx: remove checks for four macros

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: <1401388979.6603.165.camel@snotra.buserror.net>
Date:	Thu, 29 May 2014 13:42:59 -0500
From:	Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
To:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
CC:	Vitaly Bordug <vitb@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@...ck.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	<linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pcmcia: m8xx: remove checks for four macros

On Thu, 2014-05-29 at 20:39 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-05-29 at 13:20 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Sat, 2014-05-24 at 09:36 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > > This driver contains checks for four Kconfig macros. But the related
> > > Kconfig symbols have never been part of the tree. Remove these checks
> > > and the code they hide.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
> > > ---
> > > Untested.
> > > 
> > > This has been an issue ever since this driver was added in v2.6.15. Note
> > > that there is no header named "*/cpld.h", so setting PRxK can't possibly
> > > work.
> > > 
> > >  drivers/pcmcia/m8xx_pcmcia.c | 75 --------------------------------------------
> > >  1 file changed, 75 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Does anything in this driver still work?  It looks like bitrot from the
> > arch/ppc days, that sort of got updated to use the device tree -- but
> > even after this patch there are lots of instances of CONFIG symbols
> > being used to assert the exact hardware being used, rather than what
> > hardware is supported.
> 
> I'm not sure I get what you're pointing at. Can you give one example?

All the various stuff enabled by CONFIG_FADS, CONFIG_MPC885ADS, etc.
such as the voltage_set() implementation.

-Scott


--
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/