linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64_defconfig: Normalize x86

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 3 Dec 2019 17:26:20 +0800
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To:     Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Collabora Kernel ML <kernel@...labora.com>,
        groeck@...omium.org, bleung@...omium.org, dtor@...omium.org,
        fabien.lahoudere@...labora.com, guillaume.tucker@...labora.com,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        x86@...nel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Alexey Brodkin <alexey.brodkin@...opsys.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64_defconfig: Normalize x86_64 defconfig

On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 17:05, Enric Balletbo i Serra
<enric.balletbo@...labora.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> Many thanks for your quick answer.
>
> On 3/12/19 3:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 05:18, Enric Balletbo i Serra
> > <enric.balletbo@...labora.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> make savedefconfig result in some difference, lets normalize the
> >> defconfig
> >>
> >
> > No, for two reasons:
> > 1. If running savedefconfig at all, split reordering items from
> > removal of non needed options. This way we can see exactly what is
> > being removed. This patch moves things around so it is not possible to
> > understand what exactly you're doing here...
>
> Ok, makes sense, I can do it, but if you don't really care of having the
> defconfig sync with the savedefconfig output for the below reasons or others,
> that's fine with me.
>
> The reason I send the patch is because I think that, at least on some arm
> defconfigs, they try to have the defconfig sync with the savedefconfig output,
> the idea is to try to make patching the file easier, but I know this is usually
> a pain.

Till I saw DEBUG_FS removal and Steven's answer, I was all in in such
patches from time to time. However now I think it's risky and instead
manual cleanup of non-visible symbols is better.

Best regards,
Krzysztof