linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Char/Misc driver patches for 4.13-rc1

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: <CA+55aFz0y+Kff07kyx0raEqKfU45bZwbd7B0MFuvdGj4PgZBAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Jul 2017 21:51:44 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Char/Misc driver patches for 4.13-rc1

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> Peter Rosin (11):
>       mux: minimal mux subsystem

Hmm. The MULTIPLEXER question in the Kconfig strikes me as confusing
and of dubious value.

Can we please get rid of questions that people have basically an
impossible time answering, and instead have the drivers that want to
use CONFIG_MULTIPLEXER just add a "select" statement.

In fact it looks like we actually *have* the select statements, but
then we still ask the user about something they can't answer?

Most people will not have any kind of idea that whatever other driver
they are using wants to use the mux-core functionality..

                  Linus