linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers: visorbus: move driver out of staging

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: <20171118102621.GE8368@kroah.com>
Date:   Sat, 18 Nov 2017 11:26:21 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     David Kershner <david.kershner@...sys.com>
Cc:     jes.sorensen@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org, sparmaintainer@...sys.com,
        erik.arfvidson@...il.com, wadgaonkarsam@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drivers: visorbus: move driver out of staging

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:27:39PM -0500, David Kershner wrote:
>  {drivers/staging/unisys/include => include/linux/visorbus}/visorbus.h | 0
>  .../staging/unisys/include => include/linux/visorbus}/visorchannel.h  | 0

Do we really need two different include/linux .h files for this bus
subsystem?  Can we merge them both together?

> diff --git a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/Kconfig b/drivers/visorbus/Kconfig
> similarity index 90%
> rename from drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/Kconfig
> rename to drivers/visorbus/Kconfig
> index 5113880..a99285a 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/visorbus/Kconfig
> @@ -4,7 +4,9 @@
>  
>  config UNISYS_VISORBUS
>  	tristate "Unisys visorbus driver"
> -	depends on UNISYSSPAR
> +	depends on X86_64 && !UML
> +	select PCI
> +	select ACPI

Wait, what?  Why are you messing with the dependancies now?  And never
do a select if at all possible, do a 'depends on' instead.

And why not UML?  What about other arches, why are you now restricting
it?  That's an odd change to be doing here in a "move this out of
staging" patch...

thanks,

greg k-h