linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/3] reset: imx7: Support module build

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:   Mon, 29 Jun 2020 11:32:22 +0000
From:   Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        Stefan Agner <stefan.agner@...adex.com>,
        "oleksandr.suvorov@...adex.com" <oleksandr.suvorov@...adex.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] reset: imx7: Support module build

Hi, Arnd


> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] reset: imx7: Support module build
> 
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:45 PM Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>
> wrote:
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] reset: imx7: Support module build On Mon,
> > > Jun 29, 2020 at 12:25 PM Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com> wrote:
> >
> > The reset driver normally won't be removed since it is necessary for
> > drivers which need it, it is just for Android GKI support, in this
> > case, do we need to change it to module_platform_driver()?
> 
> Please at least try to do it, or explain in the changelog what went wrong if it
> doesn't work.
> 
> I don't think "because Android GKI" should ever be the sole justification for a
> patch. Making drivers loadable module is a good idea regardless of GKI, and if
> you do that, then make it behave like any other loadable module.
> 

OK, will do it in V2, BTW, I think there is nothing need to be done for .remove() callback,
can I just skip it or need to add a blank callback anyway?

Thanks,
Anson