From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=KC/l=27=lists.ozlabs.org=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
	SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BFBEC282DD
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:58:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE43520721
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:58:02 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DE43520721
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47vR1N2HGdzDqdt
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 01:58:00 +1100 (AEDT)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=arm.com
 (client-ip=217.140.110.172; helo=foss.arm.com;
 envelope-from=mark.brown@arm.com; receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org
Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172])
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47vQxQ3HCXzDqWL
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 01:54:32 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14])
 by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C647A30E;
 Fri, 10 Jan 2020 06:54:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.37.6.21])
 by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4AFA33F6C4;
 Fri, 10 Jan 2020 06:54:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 00/10] Impveovements for random.h/archrandom.h
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:54:12 +0000
Message-Id: <20200110145422.49141-1-broonie@kernel.org>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, x86@kernel.org,
 Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
 linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>

This is a resend of a series from Richard Henderson last posted back in
November:

   https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20191106141308.30535-1-rth@twiddle.net/

Back then Borislav said they looked good and asked if he should take
them through the tip tree but things seem to have got lost since then.

Original cover letter:

During patch review for an addition of archrandom.h for arm64, it was
suggeted that the arch_random_get_* functions should be marked __must_check.
Which does sound like a good idea, since the by-reference integer output
may be uninitialized when the boolean result is false.

In addition, it turns out that arch_has_random() and arch_has_random_seed()
are not used, and not easy to support for arm64.  Rather than cobble
something together that would not be testable, remove the interfaces
against some future accidental use.

In addition, I noticed a few other minor inconsistencies between the
different architectures, e.g. powerpc isn't using bool.

Change since v1:
   * Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed.

Richard Henderson (10):
  x86: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  powerpc: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  s390: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  linux/random.h: Remove arch_has_random, arch_has_random_seed
  linux/random.h: Use false with bool
  linux/random.h: Mark CONFIG_ARCH_RANDOM functions __must_check
  x86: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
  powerpc: Use bool in archrandom.h
  powerpc: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check
  s390x: Mark archrandom.h functions __must_check

 arch/powerpc/include/asm/archrandom.h | 27 +++++++++-----------------
 arch/s390/include/asm/archrandom.h    | 20 ++++---------------
 arch/x86/include/asm/archrandom.h     | 28 ++++++++++++---------------
 include/linux/random.h                | 24 ++++++++---------------
 4 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)

-- 
2.20.1