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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87d08sueu2.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
Date:   Wed, 01 Apr 2020 13:20:21 +1100
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        "linux-kernel\@vger.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

Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr> writes:
> 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 ?

I'd say just use 44x, we've had the inconsistency of 476 living in
platforms/44x, and it hasn't really led to much confusion.

I think for most folks they see 4xx/44x and just think "some 32-bit
embedded thing", so the precise distinction between 4xx, 44x, 476 etc.
is not that important to justify renaming the symbol everywhere I think.

cheers