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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CH2PR12MB3895B9BC684751BFA25B4B08D7A09@CH2PR12MB3895.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Feb 2023 19:26:47 +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



-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> 
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2023 1:54 PM
To: Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@...dia.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Support NVIDIA BlueField-3 pinctrl driver
Importance: High

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 06:44:58PM +0000, Asmaa Mnebhi wrote:
> > > +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)

I understand that, but I'm pretty sure that driver can be compiled with ACPI=n which is good for testing coverage.

Ah! OK, understood. Will remove it then.