linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] powerpc/platforms: Move files from 4xx to 44x

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:   Tue, 31 Mar 2020 18:19:01 +0200
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] powerpc/platforms: Move files from 4xx to 44x



Le 31/03/2020 à 18:04, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 5:26 PM Christophe Leroy
> <christophe.leroy@....fr> wrote:
>> Le 31/03/2020 à 17:14, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:49 AM Christophe Leroy
>>> <christophe.leroy@....fr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Only 44x uses 4xx now, so only keep one directory.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/Makefile           |  9 +++++++-
>>>>    arch/powerpc/platforms/{4xx => 44x}/cpm.c     |  0
>>>
>>> No objections to moving everything into one place, but I wonder if the
>>> combined name should be 4xx instead of 44x, given that 44x currently
>>> include 46x and 47x. OTOH your approach has the advantage of
>>> moving fewer files.
>>>
>>
>> In that case, should we also rename CONFIG_44x to CONFIG_4xx ?
> 
> That has the risk of breaking user's defconfig files, but given the
> small number of users, it may be nicer for consistency. In either
> case, the two symbols should probably hang around as synonyms,
> the question is just which one is user visible.
> 

Not sure it is a good idea to keep two synonyms. In the past we made our 
best to remove synonyms (We had CONFIG_8xx and CONFIG_PPC_8xx being 
synonyms, we had CONFIG_6xx and CONFIG_BOOK3S_32 and 
CONFIG_PPC_STD_MMU_32 being synonyms).
I think it is a lot cleaner when we can avoid synonyms.

By the way I already dropped CONFIG_4xx in previous patch (8/11). It was 
not many 4xx changed to 44x. It would be a lot more in the other way 
round I'm afraid.

But I agree with you it might be more natural to change to 4xx.

Michael, any preference ?

Christophe