linux-kernel - Re: pci: Add generic pcibios_{fixup_bus,align

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: <20170802200031.GD20308@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Aug 2017 15:00:31 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc:     linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bhelgaas@...gle.com, hch@...radead.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org, linux-cris-kernel@...s.com,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pci: Add generic pcibios_{fixup_bus,align_resource}

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 06:50:41PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> While upstreaming the RISC-V port, it was pointed out that multiple
> architectures have copied the mostly empty versions of at least one of these
> functions.  This defines weakly bound versions of the common functions and
> removes the now obselete functions from other ports.
> 
> This has been split out from the RISC-V submission so we can decouple all these
> generic changes from our port review process.  There's some discussion on an
> earlier version of the patch here
> 
>   https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/6/998
> 
> but I'm afraid a lot of this is really out of my wheelhouse (and I'm pretty
> slammed trying to get the RISC-V port in better shape), so I'm afraid I'm not
> going to be able to perform the full cleanup suggested.

Applied to pci/resource for v4.14, thanks!

There's room for future improvement, e.g., using per-host callbacks,
etc., but I think this is a clear improvement as-is.

There's some folklore about the evils of weak symbols, but I don't
know the details.  It would be useful to have them codified somewhere
in Documentation/ or near the __weak definition.