netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] bnxt_en: don't consider building bnxt

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20171007.030035.899474172732259314.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Sat, 07 Oct 2017 03:00:35 +0100 (WEST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     michael.chan@...adcom.com
Cc:     jtoppins@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] bnxt_en: don't consider building
 bnxt_tc.o if option not enabled

From: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 18:01:57 -0700

> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@...hat.com> wrote:
>> Instead of zeroing out bnxt_tc.c with a #ifdef foo, instead don't compile
>> the file when the option is not enabled. Now make and the preprocessor do
>> not have to waste time compiling a no-op.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@...hat.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>

Applied.