linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] drivers: make early

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: <20191007144421.GA966763@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Oct 2019 16:44:21 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] drivers: make early_platform code SuperH-specific

On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 09:20:25AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 03:00:31PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 11:29:11AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> > > 
> > > Some time ago I started a discussion about the need for a proper early device
> > > probing mechanism[1]. One that would be based on real platform drivers and
> > > support both platform data and device tree.
> > > 
> > > While we're far from reaching any consensus on the implementation, Arnd
> > > suggested that I start off by moving the SuperH-specific early platform
> > > drivers implementation to arch/sh[2].
> > > 
> > > This series is the first attempt at making way for a new, less hacky
> > > implementation.
> > > 
> > > The first patch moves all the early_platform code to arch/sh.
> > > 
> > > The second patch prefixes all early_platform symbols with 'sh_'.
> > > 
> > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/26/657
> > > [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/27/239
> > > 
> > > v1 -> v2:
> > > - certain drivers are compiled for arm/mach-shmobile too - we need to
> > >   add ifdefs for CONFIG_SUPERH around early_platform calls
> > > 
> > > v2 -> v3:
> > > - added a stub for is_early_platform_device() which always returns false
> > >   on non-SuperH architectures
> > > 
> > > v3 -> v4:
> > > - rebased on top of v5.4-rc1
> > > - removed patches that are already upstream from the series
> > > 
> > > Bartosz Golaszewski (2):
> > >   drivers: move the early platform device support to arch/sh
> > >   sh: add the sh_ prefix to early platform symbols
> > 
> > I like this, any objection from anyone if I take this in my driver-core
> > tree for 5.5-rc1?
> 
> I don't think I have any objection. It will probably make gratuitous
> merge conflicts with Sato-san's old device tree sh4 work when we get
> back to finishing that, but that's not really a big deal.

Ok, I've queued it up in my tree now, thanks,

greg k-h