[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72n4UFUraYeHa6ar3=F61C_UxEJ1rq92aOF_hH9rtjN+Dg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 17:47:01 +0100
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Alistair Francis <alistair@...stair23.me>,
linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lukas@...ner.de,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
boqun.feng@...il.com, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, wilfred.mallawa@....com,
ojeda@...nel.org, alistair23@...il.com, a.hindborg@...nel.org,
tmgross@...ch.edu, gary@...yguo.net, alex.gaynor@...il.com,
benno.lossin@...ton.me, Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@....com>,
Emilio Cobos Álvarez <emilio@...sal.io>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 09/20] PCI/CMA: Expose in sysfs whether devices are authenticated
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:04 PM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> As this seems like it's going to be a longer-term issue, has anyone
> thought of how it's going to be handled? Build time errors when
> functions change is the key here, no one remembers to manually verify
> each caller to verify the variables are correct anymore, that would be a
> big step backwards.
I can look into it, after other build system things are done.
I talked to Emilio some months ago about this and he told me Firefox
solves the problem both ways, so we may be able to do something
similar.
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists