linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: qcom: Introduce Hexagon V5 based WCSS driver

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:   Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:09:55 +0530
From:   Sricharan R <sricharan@...eaurora.org>
To:     Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...aro.org>
Cc:     bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, ohad@...ery.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, andy.gross@...aro.org,
        david.brown@...aro.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        sibis@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: qcom: Introduce Hexagon V5 based WCSS driver

Hi Vinod,

On 6/5/2018 10:10 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 05-06-18, 18:26, Sricharan R wrote:
>> Hi Vinod,
>>
>> On 6/5/2018 11:49 AM, Vinod wrote:
>>> On 05-06-18, 11:12, Sricharan R wrote:
>>>
>>>> +config QCOM_Q6V5_WCSS
>>>> +	tristate "Qualcomm Hexagon based WCSS Peripheral Image Loader"
>>>> +	depends on OF && ARCH_QCOM
>>>> +	depends on QCOM_SMEM
>>>> +	depends on RPMSG_QCOM_SMD || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_SMD=n)
>>>> +	depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n
>>>
>>> Is there a reason why it depends on RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n? What would
>>> happen if distro wants both this and RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM
>>>
>>   RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n should be for the COMPILE_TEST. Probably that
> 
> why would that be a limitation? I am more worried about
> RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n being the condition here. In new drivers we
> should not typically have dependency on some symbol being not there
> 

Without that, if RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=m is compiled as a module, then
it would break the build.

>>   means that it should be corrected here and for ADSP, Q6V5_PIL as well.
>>   Bjorn, is that correct ?, should it be, below ?
>>  
>>   depends on (RPMSG_QCOM_SMD || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_SMD=n)) || (RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM || (COMPILE_TEST && RPMSG_QCOM_GLINK_SMEM=n))
> 
> that doesnt really sound good :(
> 

 Hmm, but i was thinking it should functionally depend on either SMD or GLINK and not both.

Regards,
 Sricharan

-- 
"QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus