linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] platform/chrome: Make 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 18 Aug 2015 16:05:20 +0200
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
To:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>,
	Sjoerd Simons <sjoerd.simons@...labora.co.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/chrome: Make CROS_EC_PROTO a user selectable
 option

Hello Geert,

On 08/18/2015 03:54 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Javier,
> 
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
> <javier@....samsung.com> wrote:
>>>> Yes, the original Kconfig warning message was:
>>>>
>>>> warning: (MFD_CROS_EC) selects CHROME_PLATFORMS which has unmet direct dependencies (X86 || ARM)
>>>>
>>>> Paul fixed on [0] by making MFD_CROS_EC depends on X86 || ARM but that
>>>> is not really true since the driver could be used in other platforms so
>>>> I tried to instead fix it by removing unneeded dependencies in [1] but
>>>> one of the patches was nacked by Geert [2] who mentioned the issue about
>>>> mixing select and "depends on".
>>>
>>> I think that Geert's comments are valid.  Dependencies should limit
>>> the config option to the archs for which the driver is really needed
>>> (the rest can be handled with COMPILE_TEST dependency).
>>>
>>
>> Yes, which is true for the drivers under CHROME_PLATFORMS (i.e: CROS_EC_LPC
>> has X86 || COMPILE_TEST) but my point was that CHROME_PLATFORMS is not a
>> driver but a submenu that has (for now) drivers for ARM and X86. But that
>> doesn't mean that a Chromebook for another arch could be produced and then
>> you will need to add a X86 || ARM || FOO || BAR || COMPILE_TEST for
>> CHROME_PLATFORMS which seems to me kind of silly.
> 
> However, that's usually the way it is done: such a dependency is added to
> prevent the question from showing up on platforms where it doesn't make
> sense.
> 
> If the drivers become needed on other platforms, the dependency can be
> relaxed.
>

Ok, I'll reintroduce the arch dependency for CHROME_PLATFORMS then
and add a || COMPILE_TEST.

> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
>                         Geert
> 
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
> 
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>                                 -- Linus Torvalds
> 

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
--
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/