linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] drm for v4.15

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: <26729c32-cfd6-82e0-b370-a46ca951adea@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Nov 2017 13:51:09 +0100
From:   Nicolai Hähnle <nhaehnle@...il.com>
To:     Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git pull] drm for v4.15

On 16.11.2017 21:57, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On 16 November 2017 at 14:59, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There is some code touched on sound/soc, but I think the sound tree
>>> should have the same commits from the same base,so this may luck different
>>> if you pulled it as I generated my pull request a couple of days ago. Otherwise
>>> the highlights are below.
>>
>> I'm more curious about (and disgusted by) this one:
>>
>>    include/dt-bindings/msm/msm-bus-ids.h
>>
>> wtf? It's full of defines that aren't actually used anywhere.  Which
>> is just as well, since it doesn't seem to be included from anything
>> either.
>>
>> There's something odd about drm people. You guys like these completely
>> insane generated header files, and you seem to be populating the whole
>> tree with this odd and diseased notion of "generated header files are
>> cool".
>>
>> Is somebody getting paid by line of code?
> 
> It would still cost less than transcribing each register and all it's fields by
> hand from pdfs generated from the same place.

This raises the question of how people feel about putting the source 
database into the kernel (most likely as XML in our case) and 
auto-generating the headers from there instead.

I've been pondering doing this in Mesa for radeonsi for quite some time 
now. Given that the Mesa header style is different from the kernel 
header style, this could help reduce our IP review load going forward, 
and would have some other neat benefits as well.

Cheers,
Nicolai
-- 
Lerne, wie die Welt wirklich ist,
Aber vergiss niemals, wie sie sein sollte.