linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Pad retentions support for Exynos5433

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: <CAJKOXPd+WYyB4KbX2XN_Y615KR8AMZW8A+uV+6vU_AN3u+QCaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:32:33 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Pad retentions support for Exynos5433

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Linus Walleij
<linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Marek Szyprowski
> <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> wrote:
>
>> Patches in this patchset depends on each other. They are order in such a
>> way to make the changes bisectable.
>>
>> Patch #3 has runtime dependency on #1.
>> Patch #5 has runtime dependency on #3.
>> Patch #6 has runtime dependency on #4.
>>
>> This patchset also directly depends on the "Move pad retention control to
>> Exynos pin controller driver" patchset:
>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg556074.html
>
> Do we *have* to merge it runtime-bisectably?
>
> I'm asking because we need a huge immutable branch
> (I guess in the MFD subsystem) to deal with that.

It helps a lot with finding introduced issues, so I think yes - we
want it runtime-bisectable. The board has already support in mainline
so it is not theoretical runtime...

Best regards,
Krzysztof