linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Support NVIDIA BlueField-3 pinctrl driver

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 16 Feb 2023 18:44:58 +0000
From:   Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@...dia.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
CC:     "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Support NVIDIA BlueField-3 pinctrl driver

> > +config PINCTRL_MLXBF
> > +	tristate "NVIDIA BlueField-3 SoC Pinctrl driver"
> > +	depends on (MELLANOX_PLATFORM && ARM64 && ACPI)
> 
> This is wrong.
> Please make sure you cover more testing.
> Also, do you really need an ACPI dependency?
> 
> Could you please provide more details on why this is wrong? All our upstreamed drivers use the same "depends on"
> Our pinctrl driver only applies to Mellanox platforms, ARM64 and use ACPI tables.

This is wrong because it narrows down testing coverage.

Besides that you need to define functional and build dependencies separately.

ACPI probably is not what you are using in the driver. I do not believe you have at all dependency on it.

Noted, I will define function and build dependencies separately.
We have our own custom UEFI for BlueField SoCs so ACPI tables are our only options (for users/customer etc... as well)