linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] powerpc/85xx: Mark mpc85xx_ds_pic

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: <5bf1f2fc-a1de-d873-7d1b-0058ff8b9aa2@csgroup.eu>
Date:   Fri, 2 Dec 2022 18:46:18 +0000
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To:     Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
CC:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>, Sinan Akman <sinan@...teme.com>,
        "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] powerpc/85xx: Mark mpc85xx_ds_pic_init() as static



Le 26/11/2022 à 17:25, Pali Rohár a écrit :
> On Wednesday 02 November 2022 00:25:03 Pali Rohár wrote:
>> On Sunday 16 October 2022 16:59:53 Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Le 16/10/2022 à 13:05, Pali Rohár a écrit :
>>>> Hello Christophe! Do you have any other comments for this patch series?
>>>
>>> I'm AFK for two weeks, but as far as I remember I don't have any more
>>> comments.
>>
>> Hello! When you are back, could you look at my feedback to your comments?
> 
> PING?
> 
>>>>
>>>> On Monday 26 September 2022 11:47:06 Pali Rohár wrote:
>>>>> On Monday 26 September 2022 09:43:55 Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>>>> Le 19/08/2022 à 21:15, Pali Rohár a écrit :
>>>>>>> Function mpc85xx_ds_pic_init() is not used out of the mpc85xx_ds.c file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch should be squashed into patch 1.
>>>>>
>>>>> No problem. Just to explain that I split those changes into different
>>>>> patches because they touch different files and different board code.
>>>>> And I thought that different things should be in different patches.

It's fine for me if you prefer keeping them separate, up to you.

Christophe