linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support

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: <3942232.3OrEzc0z0v@wuerfel>
Date:	Wed, 04 Mar 2015 21:35:53 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc:	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
	Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@...eaurora.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Tim Bird <tim.bird@...ymobile.com>,
	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] ARM: msm multiplatform support

On Wednesday 04 March 2015 21:31:32 Paul Bolle wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann schreef op wo 04-03-2015 om 20:32 [+0100]:
> >  arch/arm/mach-msm/board-sapphire.c                 |   17 +-
> 
> Please be aware that board-sapphire.c isn't actually wired into the
> build system _at all_. It never has been (see
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/14/634 ). There's another thread were the
> submitter of this file basically refuses to remove this file, if memory
> serves me right.
> 
> I try not to use colorful language on the net. Perhaps I wouldn't have
> to bother you now if I would have used such language last year.

I noticed this, but since it was not standing in the way of what I tried
to do, I did not do anything about it here.
 
> You touch board-sapphire.c in 12/18 and 17/18. That was a waste of your
> time, however small. Should I submit a separate patch to remove it or do
> you prefer to fold such a patch into this series?

The patch would be appreciated, but I'd keep it separate from this series.
I saw a lot of things in need of cleanup in the files I touched here,
but refused the temptation, in order to get something done and not
start something controversial.

	Arnd
--
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/