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, 16 Mar 2020 11:07:45 +0800
From:   Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>
To:     Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Cc:     Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>,
        "s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        "kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        "festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
        "dmitry.torokhov@...il.com" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        "a.zummo@...ertech.it" <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        "alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com" <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        "rui.zhang@...el.com" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        "daniel.lezcano@...aro.org" <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        "amit.kucheria@...durent.com" <amit.kucheria@...durent.com>,
        "wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@....com>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux@...pel-privat.de" <linux@...pel-privat.de>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "m.felsch@...gutronix.de" <m.felsch@...gutronix.de>,
        "andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com" 
        <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "ronald@...ovation.ch" <ronald@...ovation.ch>,
        "krzk@...nel.org" <krzk@...nel.org>,
        "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
        Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>,
        Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@....com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/7] firmware: imx: Add stubs for !CONFIG_IMX_SCU case

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 02:51:47AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> Hi Shawn,
> 
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/7] firmware: imx: Add stubs for !CONFIG_IMX_SCU
> > case
> > 
> > On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 01:40:18PM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > > > Subject: [PATCH V3 1/7] firmware: imx: Add stubs for !CONFIG_IMX_SCU
> > > > case
> > >
> > > I have one patch pending reviewing.
> > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatc
> > >
> > hwork.kernel.org%2Fpatch%2F11395247%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cpeng.f
> > an%40n
> > >
> > xp.com%7C995815002e2b490791e008d7c9445133%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa9
> > 2cd99c5c
> > >
> > 301635%7C0%7C0%7C637199167574579419&amp;sdata=RM4Mtwl8LZ3ft9
> > 3uL3FQPcHT
> > > 9lPHSqBOgugozkcLvag%3D&amp;reserved=0
> > 
> > I dropped that patch from my queue and picked patch #2 from this series as
> > the favor.
> 
> I think dropping that patch might cause Linux-next build fail as previously showed,
> because IMX_SCU_SOC depends on COMPILE_TEST. If you drop that patch,
> also need to drop COMPILE_TEST from IMX_SCU_SOC.
> 
>  ld: drivers/soc/imx/soc-imx-scu.o: in function `.imx_scu_soc_probe':
>  soc-imx-scu.c:(.text.imx_scu_soc_probe+0x44): undefined reference to 
> `.imx_scu_get_handle'
>  ld: soc-imx-scu.c:(.text.imx_scu_soc_probe+0x134): undefined reference 
>  to `.imx_scu_call_rpc'
>  ld: soc-imx-scu.c:(.text.imx_scu_soc_probe+0x20c): undefined reference 
>  to `.imx_scu_call_rpc'
>  
>  Caused by commit
>  
>    68c189e3a93c ("soc: imx: increase build coverage for imx8m soc 
>  driver")
> 
> What do you prefer? I personally think dummy functions would be good.

I would rather drop COMPILE_TEST from IMX_SCU_SOC.  Could you send a
patch for that shortly?

Shawn

Powered by blists - more mailing lists