linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/8] x86/platform/uv: Return UV Hubless System Type

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: <20190904065013.GA18003@infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 3 Sep 2019 23:50:13 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dimitri Sivanich <dimitri.sivanich@....com>,
        Russ Anderson <russ.anderson@....com>,
        Hedi Berriche <hedi.berriche@....com>,
        Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] x86/platform/uv: Return UV Hubless System Type

On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 11:49:53AM -0700, Mike Travis wrote:
> 
> That is always being considered for everything we include into the community
> kernel source.  The problem is a couple of the kernel modules (hwperf being
> the prime example) is much more tied to hardware and BIOS/FW updates so has
> to be updated much more often than the current submittal/acceptance process
> allows.  We do opensource these modules but they are built from single
> source directories and have to be released as a module into a package that
> can be installed on different distros. There is not a source version for
> each kernel version.

Well, tought luck then.  We do not support interface for out of tree
modules only.  I actually found a few in uv and will send patches to
drop that dead weight.

> I have seen this method (declare the function with a leading underscore and
> a #define for the function reference) which is why I'm assuming it's a
> standard kernel practice?  (I'll find some examples if necessary?)

No, it isn't.