linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: defconfig: Enable zram, xfs and loading compressed FW support

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]

Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 16:53:26 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Enric Balletbo i Serra <eballetbo@...hat.com>,
 Erico Nunes <nunes.erico@...il.com>, Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>,
 Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@...cinc.com>,
 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
 Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: defconfig: Enable zram, xfs and loading
 compressed FW support

On 21/02/2024 16:51, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>>> Sure, but you're not just arguing for XFS there.
>>>
>>> What I really don't get is this: this makes the life of people easier.
>>>
>>> Being able to test an upstream kernel quickly when you have a bug in a
>>> downstream distro is super valuable for any distro developper. And on
>>> the long run, if we don't make the switch from a kernel distro to a
>>> mainline kernel relatively easy, we're the ones that will lose out.
>>> Because people just won't bother, or be frustrated and thus super
>>> reluctant to do that work.
>>
>> We had previously discussed adding config fragments for common
>> distros the way we have kvm_guest.config, but if the Javier's
>> patch is all that is actually needed for Fedora, that seems better
>> to me than the added complexity of fragments.
> 
> Oh, right. Fragments would be a great tool to reconcile the need for
> minimal boot time and supporting reasonable use-cases.
> 
> I guess it's even more of a struggle with the single arm64 defconfig vs
> the minimal vs batteries included defconfig setup we had for arm.

It would be cool to group also all the per-SoC needs in dedicated
fragments...

Best regards,
Krzysztof