linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] firmware: arm_scmi: add config dependency for smc transport

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]

Message-ID: <CAN5uoS9QtSrkgqePYugYys6Kgx2my+o=tmJRjQK2EVA_W1jZKw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:11:59 +0200
From:   Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@...aro.org>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Souvik Chakravarty <Souvik.Chakravarty@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] firmware: arm_scmi: add config dependency for smc transport

On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 at 17:58, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 02:33:41PM +0200, Etienne Carriere wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 23:08, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 04:37:20PM +0200, Etienne Carriere wrote:
> > > > Fix dependencies for configuration switch ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL that
> > > > is not exclusively dependent on MAILBOX since the alternate
> > > > smc transport that is depends on HAVE_ARM_SMCCC_DISCOVERY since [1].
> > > >
> > >
> > > Do you need any build issues ? I don't see why this is needed.
> > >
> >
> > This change is for consistency of the kernel configuration.
> > Without this change, a kernel configured without CONFIG_MAILBOX
> > cannot embed SCMI support even is using only the SMC transport
> > enabled thanks to HAVE_ARM_SMCCC_DISCOVERY.
> >
>
> Fair enough, however instead of adding to the list for each added transport
> we need to do better transport abstraction now that we have multiple.
> I don't see this as critical, let me know if you disagree.

Not critical, I agree :)

etienne

>
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep