linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc: select HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM in PPC instead of creating a PPC dependency

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: <0ad5f339-de31-2849-34a1-928ae65cc696@opensource.wdc.com>
Date:   Sun, 11 Sep 2022 20:54:46 +0900
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-ide@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     "kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc: select HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM in PPC instead of
 creating a PPC dependency

On 2022/09/09 20:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022, at 1:19 PM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Le 09/09/2022 à 13:09, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022, at 11:03 AM, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't see a single powerpc machine that creates a
>>>   name="pata_platform" platform_device. I suspect this was
>>> only needed bwfore 2007 commit 9cd55be4d223 ("[POWERPC] pasemi:
>>> Move electra-ide to pata_of_platform"), so the "|| PPC"
>>> bit should just get removed without adding the HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM
>>> bit.
>>
>> But that was added in 2008 by commit 61f7162117d4 ("libata: 
>> pata_of_platform: OF-Platform PATA device driver")
> 
> Ah, I see. In that case, I think we should probably just always
> allow PATA_OF_PLATFORM to be enabled regardless of
> HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM, something like
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/Kconfig b/drivers/ata/Kconfig
> index 1c9f4fb2595d..c93d97455744 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/ata/Kconfig
> @@ -1102,8 +1102,7 @@ config PATA_PCMCIA
>  	  If unsure, say N.
>  
>  config PATA_PLATFORM
> -	tristate "Generic platform device PATA support"
> -	depends on EXPERT || PPC || HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM
> +	tristate "Generic platform device PATA support" if EXPERT || HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM

Shouldn't this be:

	tristate "Generic platform device PATA support" if EXPERT || PPC

?

And while at it, it would be nice to add "|| COMPILE_TEST" too.

>  	help
>  	  This option enables support for generic directly connected ATA
>  	  devices commonly found on embedded systems.
> @@ -1112,7 +1111,8 @@ config PATA_PLATFORM
>  
>  config PATA_OF_PLATFORM
>  	tristate "OpenFirmware platform device PATA support"
> -	depends on PATA_PLATFORM && OF
> +	depends on OF
> +	select PATA_PLATFORM
>  	help
>  	  This option enables support for generic directly connected ATA
>  	  devices commonly found on embedded systems with OpenFirmware
> 
> and then also drop the "select HAVE_PATA_PLATFORM" from
> arm64 and arm/versatile.
> 
> Or we can go one step further, and either split out the
> 'pata_platform_driver' into a separate file from
> '__pata_platform_probe', or merge pata_of_platform.c
> back into pata_platform.c.
> 
>       Arnd

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research