linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: ath79: fix build failure

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: <20160330215618.GB5275@linux-mips.org>
Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 23:56:18 +0200
From:	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
To:	Antony Pavlov <antonynpavlov@...il.com>
Cc:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
	linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: ath79: fix build failure

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:13:29PM +0300, Antony Pavlov wrote:

> It is very strange because my original patch has this closing brace.
> Please see my original patch
> https://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2016-03/msg00267.html

The patch didn't apply cleanly and I botched resolving it, sorry.  I folded
the fix into the patch.

> Also I suppose that we have no need in detect_memory_region() if we use devicetree,
> e.g.
> 
>                 ath79_detect_sys_type();
>                 ath79_ddr_ctrl_init();
>  +              detect_memory_region(0, ATH79_MEM_SIZE_MIN, ATH79_MEM_SIZE_MAX);
>  +      }
>   
>  -      detect_memory_region(0, ATH79_MEM_SIZE_MIN, ATH79_MEM_SIZE_MAX);

"suppose" is a bit weak..  Should I move the detect_memory_region call?

  Ralf