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  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]
Date:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 08:59:02 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:     "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
        "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
        "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>,
        "Ertman, David M" <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
        "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ethernet/intel: fix PTP_1588_CLOCK dependencies

On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 1:09 AM Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 07:54:20PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> > So go back to "select"?
>
> Why not keep it simple?
>
> PTP core:
>    Boolean PTP_1588_CLOCK
>
> drivers:
>    depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK
>
> Also, make Posix timers always part of the core.  Tinification is a
> lost cause.

It may well be a lost cause, but a build fix is not the time to nail down
that decision. The fix I proposed (with the added MAY_USE_PTP_1588_CLOCK
symbol) is only two extra lines and leaves everything else working for the
moment. I would suggest we merge that first and then raise the question
about whether to give up on tinyfication on the summit list, there are a few
other things that have come up that would also benefit from trying less hard,
but if we overdo this, we can get to the point of hurting even systems that are
otherwise still well supported (64MB MIPS/ARMv5 SoCs, small boot partitions,
etc.).

        Arnd

Powered by blists - more mailing lists