linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: max77693: Allow building as a module

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: <20160410084650.GB9519@kozik-lap>
Date:	Sun, 10 Apr 2016 10:46:50 +0200
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: max77693: Allow building as a module

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 08:17:21AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Yes, this can be taken as is. Only second patch (changing defconfig)
> > depends on this. I can take the second patch through samsung tree but
> > that would require a tag/branch with this... which looks like an
> > overkill. So maybe you would take both?
> 
> If I take the defconfig patch without a tag, there will almost
> certainly be merge conflicts.  Other solutions include; delaying the
> defconfig patch for one cycle or trying to get it in post -rc1.

Let's wait for next cycle then. Anyway Javier added module-capability
to some other drivers as well so we can change all them at once.

Best regards,
Krzysztof