linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] mfd: cros_ec: Sync to the latest cros_ec

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:	Fri, 13 Jun 2014 08:22:09 -0700
From:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc:	Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>,
	Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@...omium.org>,
	Dylan Reid <dgreid@...omium.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] mfd: cros_ec: Sync to the latest
 cros_ec_commands.h from EC sources

Paul,

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:08 AM, Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl> wrote:
> Doug,
>
> On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 08:11 -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:37 AM, Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 09:46 +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> >> > From: Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>
>> >> >
>> >> > This just updates include/linux/mfd/cros_ec_commands.h to match the
>> >> > latest EC version (which is the One True Source for such things).  See
>> >> > <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/ec>
>>
>> I believe most of your questions are answered by checking out the git
>> tree referenced above.  ...but see below for details.  This header is
>> a common interface between the kernel and the EC.
>
> I didn't realize that this was a link to a tree.
>
>> > CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE doesn't match anything in linux-next. Is
>> > a Kconfig symbol CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE perhaps queued somewhere?
>>
>> This is a config option on the ChromeOS EC
>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/ec>.  Doing a
>> grep there:
>>
>> board/samus/board.h:#define CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE
>> common/charge_state_v2.c:#ifdef CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE
>> common/charge_state_v2.c:#ifdef CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE
>> common/charge_state_v2.c:#ifdef CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE
>> driver/battery/samus.c:#ifdef CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE
>> driver/battery/samus.c:#endif   /* CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE */
>> include/config.h:#undef CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE
>> include/ec_commands.h:  /* Range for CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE params */
>> test/test_config.h:#define CONFIG_CHARGER_PROFILE_OVERRIDE
>
> I see. So this is not a Kconfig macro but a general macro with a CONFIG_
> prefix. There are quite a bit of those in the tree already, but still,
> would another prefix also do?

Given that it's an entirely separate project and this is a valid
CONFIG option in that project, it seems a lot to ask them not to use
the CONFIG_ prefix.  Also: the part you are objecting to is only a
comment, right?

We could certainly add extra wording in the comment to make it obvious
that this is a CONFIG option for the EC and not the kernel.  Would
that be enough?  ...or are you trying to use some scripts to
automatically process files to look for CONFIG options?

-Doug
--
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/