linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

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: <20190429165319.GB16782@amd>
Date:   Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:53:20 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Marek Behun <marek.behun@....cz>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-leds@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

On Mon 2019-04-29 18:44:39, Marek Behun wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:37:53 +0200
> Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon 2019-04-29 17:38:42, Marek Behun wrote:
> > > I am sending patch only adding the I2C dep. Theoretically it is
> > > possible that someone uses the same I2C API in their microcontroller on
> > > another architecture.  
> > 
> > Theoretically. But we both now that probability of that is very low,
> > and that likely driver would need other updates, too... right?
> 
> What would be the benefit to add ARM dependency? So that distro
> compilations don't ship the turris_omnia driver unnecesarily?

That, and so that people are not asked "do you want to enable omnia
LEDs?" when they update their kernel on i386.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)