linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/12] RISC-V: Clean up the defconfigs

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, 22 Nov 2021 10:45:24 +0800
From:   Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@...il.com>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>,
        Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt@...onical.com>,
        Bin Meng <bin.meng@...driver.com>,
        Sagar Shrikant Kadam <sagar.kadam@...ive.com>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/12] RISC-V: Clean up the defconfigs

On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 12:32 PM Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 10:14 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...osinc.com> wrote:
> >
> > It's been a while since updating the defconfigs, so I figured it would
> > be good to go through all the diff to make sure nothing was lurking.  It
> > turns out there were two minor issues, which I've fixed with the first
> > two patches.  The rest of these are just cleanups that should have no
> > functional change.
> >
> > I don't have a K210 (I might somewhere, but I've yet to boot it) so I
> > can't test this to make sure, but I think patch 2 is the reason we have
> > a special !MMU PAGE_OFFSET config.  If someone does have one it'd be
> > nice to be able to remove that special case.
> >
> >
>
> Using savedefconfig, I used to always get a huge diff so thanks for
> doing this cleanups. Going forward, I suggest that we insiste everyone
> to always use "make savedefconfig" for creating defconfig patches.

Yep, using "savedefconfig" is always required by U-Boot maintainers. I
thought that's always the case for the Linux kernel but it seems it is
not the case.

Regards,
Bin