linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Update Nanobone

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

Message-ID: <Y2ykPDybdUaxJy4i@atomide.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2022 09:11:56 +0200
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     Mark Jackson <mpfj@...flow.co.uk>
Cc:     Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update Nanobone

Hi,

* Mark Jackson <mpfj@...flow.co.uk> [221109 14:35]:
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 07:37, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:
> >
> > The separate defconfig should not be needed. Please send any defconfig
> > changes to multi_v7_defconfig or omap2plu_defconfig as separate patches.
> >
> > Note that you can run make savedefconfig first to produce a minimal diff.
> > Then if adding device drivers, please add them as loadable modules where
> > possible.
> 
> But using the omap2plus_defconfig increases my kernel to 4.7MB
>
> My "custom" one has been specifically designed for the NANO platform
> and currently sits at about 3.7MB (which nicely fits into the ~4MB memory
> bank allocated to the kernel)
> 
> Hence the use of my custom defconfig.

Maybe host your defconfig somewhere on a device related wiki page?

We got rid of the board specific config files in the kernel years ago in
favor of just a few generic ones.

> I don't have modules enabled as the platform functionality is pretty fixed.

OK nothing wrong with that, multi_v7_defconfig and omap2plus_defconfig are
trying to be more generic and distro friendly.

> The defconfig I posted was created using savedefconfig.
> Is it still wrong ?

Nothing wrong with that, except it should be hosted with the device
related documentation and not in the kernel :)

Regards,

Tony