linux-kernel - Re: building i386 requires s390: "driver/crypto/Kconfig" sourcing s390 arch

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:	Fri, 18 May 2007 16:19:20 -0700
From:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To:	Linda Walsh <lkml@...nx.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: building i386 requires s390: "driver/crypto/Kconfig" sourcing
 s390 arch

On Fri, 18 May 2007 14:46:02 -0700 Linda Walsh wrote:

> Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 May 2007 12:32:47 -0700 Linda Walsh wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> Seems there is an include of s390 based config in file
> >> drivers/crypto/Kconfig: source "arch/s390/crypto/Kconfig"
> >>
> >> The line doesn't seem to be need for an i386 build (haven't
> >> tried x86_64 though).
> >>
> >> I take it that this was a braino?
> >>     
> >
> > Does it cause a problem?  If yes, what problem?
> >   
> ----
>     Yes.  My source tree has unrelated architectures removed,
> as a result when building i386 or x86_64, the config tools try to
> include files from the s390 architecture.  It isn't there. 
> I'm building x86, why should I be including files from other
> architectures.  It is hierarchically unclean.

Yes, it is.  What removes all arch-except-i386-and-x86_64 from your
kernel tree?  Can't it also do
$ sed @source "arch/s390/crypto/Kconfig"@#source "arch/s390/crypto/Kconfig"@
at the same time?

Who supports a pared-down kernel tree like this?


>     Perhaps the s390 device needs to be moved under the crypto with
> the other crypto devices?   

Sorry, I didn't quite understand that part.

> If the standard that other architectures are
> using is to put their devices in the crypto directory, then one might
> expect all crypto devices to be there.  Why should s390 stick out and
> put its crypto device someplace under the s390 tree, forcing parts of the
> s390 tree to be included when building other architectures? 

drivers/crypto/ currently contains drivers for x86_32 and s390
(the latter by indirection, which is what is causing you this
grief/problem/whatever), but it certainly looks like it could
be a home for crypto drivers on any arch.


> > It looks like someone thought that all Hardware crypto devices
> > should be listed under the same menu heading.  Makes some sense.
> >   
> I thought the idea was the menu reflected the options available in
> the specific parts/branches -- i.e. if you have the menu option in
> the crypto tree, then the source code should be there as well.

I'm not aware of that.  E.g., i386 and x86_64 share a lot of code
via "#include ../foo/bar" (and it's bad/ugly).

> I'm not sure how flexible the include system is, but can't it be
> "not included" unless compiling for ARCH_s390?

That would be the best solution IMO, if it only worked.  :(

E.g.:

if S390
source "arch/s390/crypto/Kconfig"
endif

in drivers/crypto/Kconfig.  Alas, it doesn't work.

---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
-
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/