linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fbdev: udlfb: make CONFIG_FB

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: <CAHCkknrAKGxzAYE-R3QX20W4faR9Wfjgn37peyHRJcZ6PRLENA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2025 20:43:59 +0200
From: sukrut heroorkar <hsukrut3@...il.com>
To: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>
Cc: David Hunter <david.hunter.linux@...il.com>, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, 
	Bernie Thompson <bernie@...gable.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, 
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, 
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>, Zsolt Kajtar <soci@....rulez.org>, 
	Gonzalo Silvalde Blanco <gonzalo.silvalde@...il.com>, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	llvm@...ts.linux.dev, oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, 
	skhan@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fbdev: udlfb: make CONFIG_FB_DEVICE optional

Hi

On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 8:52 AM Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Am 02.10.25 um 08:41 schrieb Helge Deller:
> >>>> kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
> >>>
> >>> Did you compile and test this code before submitting this patch?
> >>
> >> Yes, I had compiled & loaded the udlfb module with no errors. Please
> >> let me know how to proceed in this case.
> >
> > Look at the reported build error, which seems to happen in dev_dbg().
> > So, maybe in your testing you did not have debugging enabled?
> > The report contains the .config file with which you can test.
>
> Can we rather make an effort to remove the udlfb driver entirely? A few
> years back, there was one user who was still using it because of some
> problems with the DRM udl driver. But I think we've addressed them. The
> discussion is at [1].
Should I send a patch series to completely remove udlfb, since [1] echoed that
DRM udl driver is good enough?
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20201130125200.10416-1-tzimmermann@suse.de/
>
> Best regards
> Thomas
>
> >
> > Helge
>
> --
> --
> Thomas Zimmermann
> Graphics Driver Developer
> SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
> Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg, Germany
> GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman
> HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
>
>