linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/15] dmaengine: dw: fix master selection

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]

Date:	Wed, 6 Apr 2016 21:09:48 +0000
From:	"Koul, Vinod" <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To:	"andy.shevchenko@...il.com" <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	"vireshk@...nel.org" <vireshk@...nel.org>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
	"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"vgupta@...opsys.com" <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
	"tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>,
	"andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com" 
	<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	"egtvedt@...fundet.no" <egtvedt@...fundet.no>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/15] dmaengine: dw: fix master selection

On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 22:56 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 9:56 PM, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 08:10:54PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2016-04-04 at 10:03 -0700, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 04:24:40PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > +  * We need controller-specific data to set up slave
> > > > > transfers.
> > > > > +  */
> > > > > + BUG_ON(chan->private && !dw_dma_filter(chan, chan-
> > > > > > private));
> > > > I don't think BUG_ON is apt here, gracefully failing and
> > > > printing
> > > > that can
> > > > be better..
> > > 
> > > Hm, this is coming from the existing code.
> > > 
> > > I would prefer to keep this one as is since it's targeted to
> > > stable@,
> > > and I may issue sequential patch to replace BUG_ON. Sounds okay?
> > 
> > But since this is going stable, how about we remove here in the
> > patch and
> > benefit stable tree as well?
> 
> I'm fine with that. I will send you patch tomorrow.Other than that do
> we have any issues with the rest?

I did look at few more they looked fine, but didn't look at entire
series


-- 
~Vinod