linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: defconfig: enable Intel's eASIC N5X SoCFPGA and Keem Bay SoC

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 9 Mar 2021 16:19:38 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        "Paul J. Murphy" <paul.j.murphy@...el.com>,
        Daniele Alessandrelli <daniele.alessandrelli@...el.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        arm-soc <arm@...nel.org>, SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: defconfig: enable Intel's eASIC N5X SoCFPGA and
 Keem Bay SoC

On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 2:26 PM Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 3/9/21 3:29 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 08/03/2021 20:07, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> >>> index d612f633b771..9f9adcb8b0e9 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/configs/defconfig
> >>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ CONFIG_KALLSYMS_ALL=y
> >>>    CONFIG_PROFILING=y
> >>>    CONFIG_ARCH_ACTIONS=y
> >>>    CONFIG_ARCH_AGILEX=y
> >>> +CONFIG_ARCH_N5X=y
> >>
> >> I just submitted a patch for this as well. From the looks of the
> >> defconfig file, it looks like the platforms are in alphabetical order,
> >> but then I see that ARCH_SUNXI is not in it's correct spot if there is a
> >> rule for keeping things in alphabetical order.
> >>
> >
> > The rule is that order comes from savedefconfig, not alphabetical. This
> > way you avoid reshuffling of symbols on any future savedefconfig.
> >
>
> Got it. But I've done savedefconfig in the past and Arnd adviced against
> that because what if multiple patches come in with savedefconfig,
> wouldn't that cause a messy merge?

To clarify: you should not send the result of 'make savedefconfig'
if it changes the contents of the file in another way, but Krzysztof's
recommendation of adding new lines where savedefconfig would
put them is best.

        Arnd