| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200609051504.k85F4AKi028355@harpo.it.uu.se> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 17:04:10 +0200 (MEST) From: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se> To: akpm@...l.org, amirkin@...ru, dev@...ru, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] fail kernel compilation in case of unresolved symbols Kirill Korotaev writes: > At stage 2 modpost utility is used to check modules. > In case of unresolved symbols modpost only prints warning. > > IMHO it is a good idea to fail compilation process in case of > unresolved symbols, since usually such errors are left unnoticed, > but kernel modules are broken. Total disagree. A big warning is appropriate, but failure is unnecessary and harmful. Consider a big modular config, which has loads of modules I'll never need or use. Even if $random_module has an unresolved symbol, the kernel+modules will still work with a fairly high degree of probability, allowing me to test other things even though $random_module is (temporarily) broken. Your suggestion would either force me to reconfigure to avoid the broken module (allowing me to forget about it), or it would prevent me from testing that kernel at all until I or someone else fixed the $random_module breakage. Either way, testing suffers. - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists