linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: samsung: Save defconfig for Exynos, S3C and S5P configs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3GT3L0KaA2jLWWRuSpsTOCo0d=0hqX3Xh=yV3AZ72Drg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2017 09:25:15 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: samsung: Save defconfig for Exynos, S3C and S5P configs

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 09:49:58PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > Some configs for Samsung ARM SoCs were not updated for some time and
>> > they still contain obsolete Kconfig entries.  Generate new defconfig for
>> > all Samsung ARM architectures (Exynos, S3C24xx, S3C64xx, S5Pv210).
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>>
>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>
>> Updating the defconfig files is good, but I'm always a little unsure
>> about loss of
>> information when we do that. Would it be possible for you to split this patch
>> into two halves, with one of them just reordering the entries that moved,
>> and the second one removing the entries that have disappeared, with an
>> explanation for why they are no longer there? That would let us see whether
>> the change was intentional and avoid problems from renamed Kconfig
>> symbols that are no longer enabled afterwards.
>
> Splitting the change into two commits (reorder and removal) makes sense.
> However getting the information why some things were removed, will
> require more effort. I'll see what I can do.

Ok, thanks!

       Arnd