linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] acpi, spcr: Make SPCR avialable to other architectures

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]

Date:   Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:49:43 +0000
From:   Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To:     Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@...hat.com>,
        Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, graeme.gregory@...aro.org,
        mark.salter@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] acpi, spcr: Make SPCR avialable to other
 architectures

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 08:08:08AM -0600, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On 12/14/17 4:30 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> >>I didn't want to put any ACPI code in amba-pl011.c, so putting it in spcr.c
> >>made the most sense.  I agree the global variable is ugly.  If you have a
> >>better idea, I'm all ears.
> 
> >I told you my idea. It could have been made easier by reusing the
> >ACPI_DECLARE_PROBE_ENTRY() mechanism.
> 
> Sorry, I don't mean to be difficult, but when did you tell *me* this idea of
> yours?  I don't see any email from you to me that mentions

I said that IMO it would have been better if the quirk was managed in
amba-pl011.c - you had your reasons not to do it, end of the story.

> ACPI_DECLARE_PROBE_ENTRY().  I've never even heard of that macro before.
> Please note that I'm not the original author of this code.

It is what it is, let's move on, we will keep this in mind if a similar
quirk is required.

Thanks,
Lorenzo