linux-kernel - Re: drm/layerscape: Add Freescale DCU DRM driver

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]

Message-ID: <CANk3uyCGPgM6B8CAuaJbQGLgzKS_QeQqsKqwYzEHD2uNUKjQMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 24 Aug 2015 12:10:21 +0800
From:	Jianwei Wang <jianwei.wang.chn@...il.com>
To:	Andreas Ruprecht <andreas.ruprecht@....de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	Xiubo Li <lixiubo@...s.chinamobile.com>,
	Alison Wang <b18965@...escale.com>,
	Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>,
	Stefan Hengelein <stefan.hengelein@....de>
Subject: Re: drm/layerscape: Add Freescale DCU DRM driver

Hi Andreas,

Sorry for the late reply. Yes, this driver should also work on the
arm64 SOCs using DCU in the future. So I did some prepare for adapting
arm64 SOCs. But for now, It only support 32bit arm SOCs.

Regards,

Jianwei.

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Andreas Ruprecht
<andreas.ruprecht@....de> wrote:
> Hi Jianwei,
>
> your commit 109eee2f2a18 ("drm/layerscape: Add Freescale DCU DRM
> driver") showed up in linux-next today (i.e., next-20150821). I noticed
> it because we are running a daily analysis on the newest linux-next tree
> as part of our research.
>
> In the source code of fsl_dcu_drm_drv.c, there is the following #ifdef:
>  #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
>         .compat_ioctl   = drm_compat_ioctl,
>  #endif
>
> The Kconfig option for the driver, however, states that the driver can
> only be built with CONFIG_ARM enabled:
>
> config DRM_FSL_DCU
>        tristate "DRM Support for Freescale DCU"
>        depends on DRM && OF && ARM
>        [...]
>
> Inside arch/arm/, however, there is no definition of CONFIG_COMPAT (note
> that there is one in arch/arm64/, but the driver explicitely needs
> CONFIG_ARM), so the #ifdef block above can never be compiled in the
> current state. Is this intended?
>
> Regards,
>
> Andreas
--
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/