linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mtd: rawnand: ingenic: Limit MTD_NAND

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]

Message-ID: <20200803103648.17273c10@xps13>
Date:   Mon, 3 Aug 2020 10:36:48 +0200
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
        Harvey Hunt <harveyhuntnexus@...il.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mtd: rawnand: ingenic: Limit MTD_NAND_JZ4780 to
 architecture only

Hello,

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote on Mon, 27 Jul 2020 19:28:48 +0200:

> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 7:03 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:55:54AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:  
> > >
> > > The way we do it on Arm, the machine Kconfig identifiers stay around
> > > even for multiplatform targets (which now make up basically actively
> > > maintained machines).
> > >
> > > I don't think it makes any sense for a driver to depend on MIPS_GENERIC:
> > > either it is a generic driver that should always be visible or it is specific
> > > to a set of SoCs and should depend on some corresponding vendor
> > > specific identifiers.  
> >
> > If support for Ingenic is provided also by MIPS_GENERIC (without
> > selecting MACH_INGENIC), then it makes sense. This would be just a
> > different way than ARM of building multi-platform kernel.  
> 
> Yes, it would work just as well, my point was just that it is somewhat
> confusing to have every architecture do it differently, and that I
> prefer the way Arm (and also ppc, x86 etc) handles it today.
> 
> On MIPS, most platforms are not yet part of MIPS_GENERIC, so
> they are fairly free to pick whatever method works best and is
> consistent with the rest of the kernel.

In the end, shall I apply Krzysztof patch or shall I wait for an update
(eg. without 'default y')?

Thanks,
Miquèl