linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: Remove '-Wno-deprecated-declarations' compiler warning

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: <fed6012f3438f996cd2e7cb62e8eee58964fa36c.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Date:   Mon, 20 Aug 2018 21:25:24 +1000
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        sedat.dilek@...dativ.de, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <pmac@....ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: Remove '-Wno-deprecated-declarations' compiler
 warning

On Mon, 2018-08-20 at 10:06 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
> > Some people still use those old machines, I'll give a try at fixing the
> > driver.
> 
> I did this here a while ago [1] ("macintosh: therm_windtunnel: drop
> using attach adapter")...
> 
> > Paul: Do you still have one of these machines ?
> 
> ... but this was the main problem. I couldn't find anyone to test this.
> Even asked on PPC lists of various distributions.

Yeah this one is annoying because it's only used by one specific
machine model..

> Note that we did apply the same approach of patch [1] already in commit
> ac397c80de89 ("ALSA: ppc: keywest: drop using attach adapter"). This has
> been tested on HW. I also have a hack to make this driver probe on one
> of my ARM boards. Of course, no real HW present there, but shows that
> the new probing works at least there.
> 
> This is very interesting timing, too. Because I wanted to use the
> tentative version jump to 5.0 to finally get rid of this deprecated
> feature independently of the discussion here. Which would have meant
> resending the patch and arguing we have enough indications that the
> patch [1] is sane. And then I could finally remove this callback.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>    Wolfram
> 
> [1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/461759/

Ok, worst case we can remove the driver and re-instate it back later if
somebody complains, but I'll try to chase a machine first.

Cheers,
Ben.