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  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:   Fri, 24 May 2019 17:22:47 -0700
From:   Frank Rowand <>
To:     Saravana Kannan <>
Cc:     Rob Herring <>,
        Mark Rutland <>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,,,
        Android Kernel Team <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] Solve postboot supplier cleanup and optimize probe

On 5/24/19 2:53 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:49 AM Frank Rowand <> wrote:
>> On 5/23/19 6:01 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:

< snip >

>> Another flaw with this method is that existing device trees
>> will be broken after the kernel is modified, because existing
>> device trees do not have the depends-on property.  This breaks
>> the devicetree compatibility rules.
> This is 100% not true with the current implementation. I actually
> tested this. This is fully backwards compatible. That's another reason
> for adding depends-on and going by just what it says. The existing
> bindings were never meant to describe only mandatory dependencies. So
> using them as such is what would break backwards compatibility.

Are you saying that an existing, already compiled, devicetree (an FDT)
can be used to boot a new kernel that has implemented this patch set?

The new kernel will boot with the existing FDT that does not have
any depends-on properties?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists