linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic: Add dependency for ARM

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a70d614e-4788-f09b-0fe3-eb3c762a1113@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:42:09 +0100
From:   Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To:     Jiangfeng Xiao <xiaojiangfeng@...wei.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        jason@...edaemon.net, linus.walleij@...aro.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic: Add dependency for ARM_GIC

On 27/06/2019 15:30, Jiangfeng Xiao wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2019/6/27 22:20, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 27/06/2019 15:11, Jiangfeng Xiao wrote:
>>> Not every arch has ARM_GIC, it is strange
>>> to see ARM_GIC_MAX_NR in the .config file
>>> of the x86 and IA-64 architecture. so fix
>>> build by adding necessary dependency.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jiangfeng Xiao <xiaojiangfeng@...wei.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/irqchip/Kconfig | 1 +
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
>>> index 659c5e0..e338b471 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/Kconfig
>>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ config ARM_GIC_PM
>>>  
>>>  config ARM_GIC_MAX_NR
>>>  	int
>>> +	depends on ARM_GIC
>>>  	default 2 if ARCH_REALVIEW
>>>  	default 1
>>>  
>>>
>>
>> Isn't that the patch[1] that has already been in -next for the past 10 
>> days or so?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> 	M.
>>
>> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git/commit/?h=irq/irqchip-next&id=702655234dd1d07e76f9bff9575e438c969fc32c
>>
> 
> I am very sorry. I thought that this patch was not reviewed,
> so I pushed it again. I asked my colleagues how to get information
> about whether the patch is included.
> 
> Will not make this low-level mistake again.

No worries. I should have replied to the initial patch to indicate that
I had queued it, but it appear I didn't! No harm done anyway.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...