linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv1] firmware: intel_stratix10

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, 23 Jan 2019 17:43:17 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>
Cc:     Richard Gong <richard.gong@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        todd.riffel@...el.com, Richard Gong <richard.gong@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv1] firmware: intel_stratix10_service: add hardware
 dependency

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:37:07AM -0600, Alan Tull wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:00 AM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Greg,
> 
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:47:56AM -0600, richard.gong@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> > > From: Richard Gong <richard.gong@...el.com>
> > >
> > > Add a Kconfig dependency to ensure Intel Stratix10 service layer driver
> > > can be built only on the platform that supports it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Richard Gong <richard.gong@...el.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/firmware/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/Kconfig b/drivers/firmware/Kconfig
> > > index f754578..cac16c4 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/firmware/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/Kconfig
> > > @@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ config FW_CFG_SYSFS_CMDLINE
> > >
> > >  config INTEL_STRATIX10_SERVICE
> > >       tristate "Intel Stratix10 Service Layer"
> > > -     depends on HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
> > > +     depends on ARCH_STRATIX10 && HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
> >
> > That's lame, what about building for testing?
> 
> Do you mean this instead?
> 
> depends on (ARCH_STRATIX10 && HAVE_ARM_SMCCC) || COMPILE_TEST

Yes, that would be better, right?

> >
> > And is this needed now, for 5.0-final, or can it wait for 5.1?
> 
> This change will reduce kernel size for most arm64.  It can go into
> whichever kernel.  We can resubmit allowing for COMPILE_TEST.

So it's not fixing a bug, but rather just allowing you to shrink an
image?  If so, then 5.1 is good.

Please resubmit, after making sure it doesn't break the normal builds :)

thanks,

greg k-h