linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/clocksource/timer-of: Remove _

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:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:56:32 +0200
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc:     Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Sandeep Patil <sspatil@...roid.com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@...il.com>,
        Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/clocksource/timer-of: Remove __init markings

On Tue, 28 Apr 2020 at 20:55, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On 28/04/2020 20:23, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:02 AM Daniel Lezcano
> > <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Saravana,
> >
> > You were replying to Sandeep :)
>
> Oh, right :)
>
> Sorry Sandeep. Thanks for taking the time to elaborate a clear statement
> of the GKI.
>
> [ ... ]
>
> >> That was my understanding of the GKI, thanks for confirming.
> >>
> >> Putting apart the non-technical aspect of these changes, the benefit I
> >> see is the memory usage optimization regarding the single kernel image.
> >>
> >> With the ARM64 defconfig, multiple platforms and their corresponding
> >> drivers are compiled-in. It results in a big kernel image which fails to
> >> load because of overlapping on DT load address (or something else). When
> >> that is detected, it is fine to adjust the load addresses, otherwise it
> >> is painful to narrow down the root cause.
> >>
> >> In order to prevent this, we have to customize the defconfig each
> >> version release.
> >
> > Sorry, I'm not sure I understand where you are going with this. Are
> > you agreeing to pick up this change?
>
> Right. I agree with the change but I would like to have Thomas opinion
> on this before picking the patch.
>
> Thomas ?

I am not Thomas :-) But just wanted to provide some feedback from my side.

In general we are careful when deciding to export symbols. And at
least, I think at least we should require one user of it before
allowing it to be exported (I assume that is what is happening in
patch2/2 - I couldn't find it)

Kind regards
Uffe