linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] depmod: sort output according to modules.order

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:	Thu, 6 Dec 2007 23:37:54 +0100
From:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, notting@...hat.com,
	rusty@...tcorp.com.au, kay.sievers@...y.org, greg@...ah.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] depmod: sort output according to modules.order

On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 08:28:03AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 04:34:30PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> Tejun Heo wrote:
> >>>> It would also simplify the kbuild integration if depmod
> >>>> could read the modules as a space separated list where
> >>>> duplicates are allowed.
> >>>> If we do so then the is no reason to escape to the shell
> >>>> in Makeilfe.build and we do not have to remove duplicates either.
> >>> I'm no Makefile expert so no doubt my modifications are ugly.  But I
> >>> think producing a file w/ duplicates in it is just ugly.
> >> Oh, and, depmod should do just fine with duplicate entries as it is.
> > What is the purpose of REMOVE-DUP then?
> > If depmod handle duplicate entries there is no need to remove them.
> 
> As I said, I don't think leaving duplicate lines in a file which will be
> installed, distributed and used widely is the RTTD.  There can be other
> uses of the file.  For example, the file can be parsed and modified by
> distro specific module selector.  Sure, all of them can be made to deal
> with dup entries but that's just not the right place to solve the problem.

googled a bit.
It looks like:
awk '!x[$0]++'
does the trick.

So we can skip the C file (good thing).
> 
> > And this change in Makefile.lib seems bogus:
> > +# make sure '/' follows subdirs
> > +subdir-y       := $(patsubst %//,%/, $(addsuffix, /,$subdir-y))
> > +subdir-m       := $(patsubst %//,%/, $(addsuffix, /,$subdir-m))
> 
> Some subdir-y|m entries have following / while others don't.  subdir-y|m
> are lax about because either way it points to subdirectory.  The above
> two lines are to normalize them so that there's no surprises when
> concatenating file name to it.  I think it's a good idea to have the
> above with or without other changes.
With this change building modpost no longer worked so kbuild
does not like the preceeding slashes. It could be fixed but thats
another patch.
> 
> > I commented it out and with my config everything seems to still
> > work as expected.
> 
> Yeah, it depends on config.  If you don't have subdir-y|m entries which
> don't have following '/', it will work just fine.  If you do, it will break.
> 
> > And I get scripts/mod/modpost built in a mrproper tree again (bug!).
> 
> This I dunno much about.
> 
> > subdir-y and subdir-m does not point to directories that
> > contains modules (built-in or not) so they can be ignored for modorder.
> 
> I didn't know that.  Is it forced that modules can't be put in
> subdir-y|m directories?  What happens if I do that?

I guess modules can be built as modules - but they can never be built-in.
And if someone uses subdir-y to point to a dir with modules
I would anyway cosider that a bug.

	Sam
--
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/