linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 01/18] remoteproc: st_slim

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]

Date:   Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:11:36 +0100
From:   Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...inux.com, vinod.koul@...el.com, patrice.chotard@...com,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, airlied@...ux.ie, kraxel@...hat.com,
        ohad@...ery.com, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/18] remoteproc: st_slim_rproc: add a slimcore rproc
 driver

Hi Bjorn,

On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Bjorn Andersson wrote:

> On Tue 30 Aug 05:34 PDT 2016, Lee Jones wrote:
> 
> Thanks for your review Lee.
> 
> > On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, Peter Griffin wrote:
> [..]
> > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > > index 1a8bf76a..06765e0 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/Kconfig
> > > @@ -100,4 +100,12 @@ config ST_REMOTEPROC
> > >  	  processor framework.
> > >  	  This can be either built-in or a loadable module.
> > >  
> > > +config ST_SLIM_REMOTEPROC
> > > +	tristate "ST Slim remoteproc support"
> > > +	select REMOTEPROC
> > > +	help
> > > +	  Say y here to support firmware loading on IP based around
> > > +	  the Slim core.
> > > +	  If unsure say N.
> 
> Saw one more thing when browsing through...
> 
> As this piece of code doesn't do anything on its own and is going to be
> selected by the "function driver" I don't think this should be
> user-selectable.

Applogies, I believe you pointed this out in a previous review, but it seems to
have slipped through the net. Will fix in the next version.

Regards,

Peter.