linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2,1/5] powerpc: 85xx: make FSL_85XX_CACHE

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]

Date:   Wed, 15 Apr 2020 21:11:13 -0700
From:   Wang Wenhu <wenhu.wang@...o.com>
To:     oss@...error.net, Wang Wenhu <wenhu.wang@...o.com>,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     christophe.leroy@....fr, kernel@...o.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        mpe@...erman.id.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2,1/5] powerpc: 85xx: make FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM configurable

From: Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>

>> +	bool "32-bit kernel"
>
>Why make that user selectable ?
>
>Either a kernel is 64-bit or it is 32-bit. So having PPC64 user 
>selectable is all we need.
>
>And what is the link between this change and the description in the log ?
>
>>   	default y if !PPC64
>>   	select KASAN_VMALLOC if KASAN && MODULES
>>   
>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ config PPC_BOOK3S_32
>>   	bool
>>   
>>   menu "Processor support"
>> +
>
>Why adding this space ?
>
>>   choice
>>   	prompt "Processor Type"
>>   	depends on PPC32
>> @@ -211,9 +212,9 @@ config PPC_BOOK3E
>>   	depends on PPC_BOOK3E_64
>>   
>>   config E500
>> +	bool "e500 Support"
>>   	select FSL_EMB_PERFMON
>>   	select PPC_FSL_BOOK3E
>> -	bool
>
>Why make this user-selectable ? This is already selected by the 
>processors requiring it, ie 8500, e5500 and e6500.
>
>Is there any other case where we need E500 ?
>
>And again, what's the link between this change and the description in 
>the log ?
>
>
>>   
>>   config PPC_E500MC
>>   	bool "e500mc Support"
>> 
>
>Christophe

Hi, Scott, Christophe!

I find that I did not get the point well of the defferences between
configurability and selectability(maybe words I created) of Kconfig items.

You are right that FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM should only be selected by a caller
but never enable it seperately.

Same answer for the comments from Christophe. I will drop this patch in v3.

Thanks,
Wenhu