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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 16:31:45 -0600 From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> To: Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com> Cc: "liudongdong (C)" <liudongdong3@...wei.com>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>, "Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com" <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>, "tn@...ihalf.com" <tn@...ihalf.com>, "Wangzhou (B)" <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>, "pratyush.anand@...il.com" <pratyush.anand@...il.com>, "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>, "Chenxin (Charles)" <charles.chenxin@...wei.com>, "hanjun.guo@...aro.org" <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>, Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/2] PCI/ACPI: hisi: Add ACPI support for HiSilicon SoCs Host Controllers On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 09:09:28AM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote: > > > +config PCI_HISI_ACPI > > > + depends on ACPI && ARM64 > > > + bool "HiSilicon Hip05 and Hip06 and Hip07 SoCs ACPI PCIe > > controllers" > > > + select PNP > > > + help > > > + Say Y here if you want ACPI PCIe controller support on > > HiSilicon > > > + Hip05 and Hip06 and Hip07 SoCs > > > > I'm not sure about this Kconfig setup. Do we really want to force > > people to enable a special config option to get this support? > > > > I'm comparing it in my mind with other PCI quirks. They're all > > enabled as a group by CONFIG_PCI_QUIRKS. Ultimately we want an ACPI > > kernel to work without requiring any platform-specific config options. > > > > I'm wondering if we should consolidate all the ECAM quirk code in a > > single place (maybe pci/ecam-quirks.c, pci/ecam.c, or pci/pci-acpi.c), > > under a config option like CONFIG_PCI_ECAM_QUIRKS or maybe even plain > > CONFIG_PCI_QUIRKS (of course, it could still be qualified by > > CONFIG_ACPI and CONFIG_ARM64). > > What about having a single config options but keeping separate files > for each vendors (at least as first step)? That sounds fine. The main thing is that we're trying to build a generic kernel that can run on any ACPI arm64 platform, so we really shouldn't have to turn on platform-specific config options. > Maybe if we see that we can consolidate all the vendors in one file > we can do it as a second step...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists