linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] kgdb: Handle HAS

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: <20240403130243.41a65a767f03fd7c4d8dabf8@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 13:02:43 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] kgdb: Handle HAS_IOPORT dependencies

On Wed,  3 Apr 2024 15:25:46 +0200 Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
> This is a follow up in my ongoing effort of making inb()/outb() and
> similar I/O port accessors compile-time optional. Previously I sent this
> as a treewide series titled "treewide: Remove I/O port accessors for
> HAS_IOPORT=n" with the latest being its 5th version[0]. With a significant
> subset of patches merged I've changed over to per-subsystem series. These
> series are stand alone and should be merged via the relevant tree such
> that with all subsystems complete we can follow this up with the final
> patch that will make the I/O port accessors compile-time optional.
> 
> The current state of the full series with changes to the remaining
> subsystems and the aforementioned final patch can be found for your
> convenience on my git.kernel.org tree in the has_ioport_v6 branch[1] with
> signed tags. As for compile-time vs runtime see Linus' reply to my first
> attempt[2].

Thanks.

I'm not fully understanding the timing.  Am I correct in believing that the 44
other patches are not dependent upon this one?  And that this patch is not
dependent upon those 44?