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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 19:02:32 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> To: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>, Georgy Vlasov <Georgy.Vlasov@...kalelectronics.ru>, Ramil Zaripov <Ramil.Zaripov@...kalelectronics.ru>, Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>, Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>, Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Wan Ahmad Zainie <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@...el.com>, Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, Clement Leger <cleger@...ray.eu>, linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/16] spi: dw: Discard static DW DMA slave structures On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 6:58 PM Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru> wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 04:51:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 03:12:28PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > > > > Well, for me both solutions are equal except mine consumes less stack memory. > > > The only reason why your solution might be better is that if DW DMA driver or > > > the DMA engine subsystem changed the dw_dma_slave structure instance passed to > > > the dma_request_channel() method, which non of them do. So I'll leave this for > > > Mark to decide. Mark, could you give us your final word about this? > > > > Honestly I'm struggling to care either way. I guess saving a bit of > > stack is potentially useful. > > Settled then. With whom? > Let's leave the patch as is. Mark, should I send a partial revert afterwards in this case? I'm not fully satisfied with it. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists