linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usb: rework CONFIG_USB

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4019862.J6BPYbmbYs@wuerfel>
Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:53:45 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Bin Liu <b-liu@...com>, Peter Chen <hzpeterchen@...il.com>,
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
	Peter Chen <peter.chen@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: rework CONFIG_USB_COMMON logic

On Wednesday 30 March 2016 13:31:01 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:
> > [ text/plain ]
> > The phy-am335x driver selects 'USB_COMMON', but all other drivers
> > use 'depends on' for that symbol, and it depends on USB || USB_GADGET
> > itself, which causes a Kconfig warning:
> >
> > warning: (AM335X_PHY_USB) selects USB_COMMON which has unmet direct dependencies (USB_SUPPORT && (USB || USB_GADGET))
> >
> > As suggested by Felipe Balbi, this turns the logic around, and makes
> > 'USB_COMMON' selected by everything else that needs it, so we can
> > remove the dependencies.
> >
> > Fixes: 59f042f644c5 ("usb: phy: phy-am335x: bypass first VBUS sensing for host-only mode")
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Peter Chen <peter.chen@....com>
> > ---
> > I seem to have dropped the ball on this one after my initial submission
> > when it wasn't clear who should merge the patch.
> >
> > Please apply to the USB or the USB gadget tree, whoever gets there
> > first.
> 
> seems like this is one of those "can wait for next merge window" right ?
> I'll take it through my tree. No issues.

Correct, it's not urgent at all, I just want it to disappear from
my backlog of unapplied patches.

	Arnd