linux-kernel - Re: why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module?

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]

Message-ID: <46474E1A.6080904@simon.arlott.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 13 May 2007 18:42:50 +0100
From:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>
CC:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module?

On 13/05/07 17:27, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 12:20 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>> since this thread looks like it's going to get away from me in a
>> hurry :-), my only point in asking was to point out that that lone
>> module was the only thing preventing the build from being module-free.
>>
>> i'm not saying that that's *necessarily* a good thing, but it just
>> strikes me as odd that, out of all of the possible modules that might
>> be selected in a default config for x86, this was the *only* one that
>> was picked.
>>
>> i just think it's a bit weird, that's all.
> 
> It's designed on the predicate that people who want to be module free
> will actually set CONFIG_MODULE=n.
> 
> If you set CONFIG_MODULE=y and build SCSI we assume you could have a
> SCSI driver module at some point, which would necessitate the wait scan
> module.

This should be implemented like "Library routines" and only added if such 
a SCSI driver module is actually selected. Why can't it at least be a 
visible option in the menu? (Although even then it looks like it's 
impossible to disable).

Why does ATA select SCSI anyway? Surely PATA doesn't require it?

-- 
Simon Arlott
-
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/