linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] Revert "ssb: Prevent build of PCI host features in module"

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:   Sat, 12 May 2018 10:01:36 +0200
From:   Michael Büsch <m@...s.ch>
To:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
        Matt Redfearn <matt.redfearn@...s.com>,
        "linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] Revert "ssb: Prevent build of PCI host features
 in module"

On Sat, 12 May 2018 10:50:42 +0300
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> wrote:

> Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net> writes:
> 
> > On 05/11/2018 05:13 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:  
> >> Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com> writes:
> >>  
> >>> On 11 May 2018 at 11:17, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com> wrote:  
>  [...]  
> >>>
> >>> As these patches fix regression/build error, I believe both should get
> >>> into 4.17.  
> >>
> >> How much confidence do we have that we don't need to end up reverting
> >> patch 2 as well? I rather be pushing patch 2 to 4.18 so that there's
> >> more time for testing and waiting for feedback.  
> >
> > Although I do not have the hardware to test the builds, I worked
> > closely with the OP in the bug at b.r.c noted above. From that effort,
> > it became clear what configuration variables were missing to cause the
> > x86 failures. Patch 2 satisfies the requirement, and prevents the
> > build problems found by the MIPS users. Both patches are needed in
> > 4.17.  
> 
> And I assume Michael is ok with this approach as well as I haven't heard
> from him. I'll then push both of these to 4.17.
> 

Yes, I'm OK with the patch, if we have a third patch that cleans up the
PCI_DRIVERS_LEGACY dependency by moving it to SSB_PCICORE_HOSTMODE
where it belongs. (This doesn't need to go into the stable tree.)
We currently implicitly get that via dependency chain, so this is OK
for now as-is.

-- 
Michael

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped