linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] UIO: make maximum memory and port regions configurable

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]

Message-ID: <20200319074826.GA3444175@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:48:26 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Qiang Su <suqiang4@...wei.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] UIO: make maximum memory and port regions configurable

On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 03:39:23PM +0800, Qiang Su wrote:
> Now each uio device can only support 5 memory regions and
> 5 port regions. It may be far from enough for some big system.
> On the other hand, the hard-coded style is not flexible.
> So make these values configurable by menuconfig, thus users
> can easily expand them according to their actual situation.
> 
> Consider the marco is used as array index, so a range for
> the config is set in menuconfig. The range is set as 1 to 512.
> The default value is still set as 5 to keep consistent with
> current code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Qiang Su <suqiang4@...wei.com>
> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

What?  No, I did not review this, do not add a tag like that for a patch
that I have not explicitly given it for.

And how is the kbuild bot reporting problems that this patch fixes?
Where is that report?

Also, I want this to be dynamic, not static, please do that instead, no
one rebuilds their kernels for something like this.

thanks,

greg k-h