linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave

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]

Date:   Mon, 3 Feb 2020 12:37:27 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
Cc:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        dmaengine <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] dmaengine: Stear users towards dma_request_slave_chan()

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 12:32 PM Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com> wrote:

> dma_request_slave_channel_reason() no longer have user in mainline, it
> can be removed.
>
> Advise users of dma_request_slave_channel() and
> dma_request_slave_channel_compat() to move to dma_request_slave_chan()

How? There are legacy ARM boards you have to care / remove before.
DMAengine subsystem makes a p*s off decisions without taking care of
(I'm talking now about dma release callback, for example) end users.
They will be scary for no reason.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko