netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] net: cadence: Add architecture dependencies

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: <20140423152710.4e6b7b9c@endymion.delvare>
Date:	Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:27:10 +0200
From:	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
To:	monstr@...str.eu
Cc:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: cadence: Add architecture dependencies

Hi Michal,

On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:16:04 +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 04/23/2014 01:34 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 01:14:41PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> >> Any reason to hide this driver for x86?
> > 
> > Distro maintainers like Jean are complaining about build times for their
> > kernels if they enable absolutely everything so if they're never likely
> > to see any hardware using something they want to skip it.

Exactly. See this discussion thread for details:
  https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/14/280

> Is there any reasonable solution for this?
> 1. One group is saying use COMPILE_TEST for every driver to have better
> coverage.

I think pretty much everyone agrees with this. The problem is that
COMPILE_TEST is relatively new so a lot of old drivers don't have it
yet, and developers and maintainers are not yet used to using it or
asking for it.

> 2. Next group is saying I don't want to build everything for my arch.

I don't understand what you mean here.

The idea is that distro maintainers or simple users don't set
COMPILE_TEST so they only see what is useful to them, while developers
set COMPILE_TEST to be able to build-test everything.

Before COMPILE_TEST was introduced, it wasn't possible to make everyone
happy. Now it is, so let's just do it.

> Fixing Kconfig to say !x86 is probably not the right way to go.

Definitely not. I did not even consider it as an acceptable workaround.
If we can't come up with reasonable dependencies for a given driver, we
can just leave it as is. There's plenty of easier drivers to work on :)

> Isn't it enough not to enable absolutely everything?

Everything that is visible requires everyone around to make a decision.
The more we can help them, the easier the process.

-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html