linux-kernel - Re: broken ACPI NUMA config option

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]

Date:	Sun, 09 Sep 2007 09:41:26 -0400
From:	"James C. Georgas" <jgeorgas@...rgas.ca>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: broken ACPI NUMA config option

On Sat, 2007-08-09 at 22:00 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > For example, you would only need to specify one "select" directive in
> > X86_64_ACPI_NUMA, (i.e. to turn on ACPI_NUMA). The configuration system
> > would then recursively walk up ACPI_NUMA's dependency hierarchy, turning
> > on what it needed.
> 
> That is highly desirable IMO.  Not having that is one of the things
> that makes using 'select' "evil."
> 
> Have you looked at the code and given any thought to implementing this?
> 

I'd like to take a run at it. The only issue I foresee is what to do
about multiple OR dependencies. There are some kconfig options that
depend on at least one of a set of specified dependencies. For example,
is ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE selectable if only one of NUMA || EXPERIMENTAL
is selected? So do we abort, select one, or select all dependencies?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the usage of || here though. I'm assuming
inclusive OR.

James
	/\V

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/