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: <20071210145854.GC2082@Krystal> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:58:54 -0500 From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> To: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com> Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] Instrumentation menu removal, against 2.6.24-rc4-mm1 (mmotm) * Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli (ananth@...ibm.com) wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 02:27:41PM +0530, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 10:32:55AM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > > > This time I am taking no chance : > > > > > > The instrumentation menu removal patchset here applies against 2.6.24-rc4-mm1 > > > _and_ against mmotm (dated : stamp-2007-12-05-15-24) without problem. > > > > > > We should hopefully be able to stop racing against other architecture specific > > > fixes done underneath. Please be aware that the following fix : > > > > > > - fix-oprofile-configuration-breakage.patch > > > > > > from MIPS did not show up in your mmotm tree. I guess you just sent it upstream > > > without keeping it in your own tree. I have applied the content of this fix in > > > my patchset (meaning : select HAVE_OPROFILE if !MIPS_MT_SMTC in > > > add-have-oprofile.patch), but I think you might have a reject if you still have > > > this fix-oprofile-configuration-breakage.patch in your local tree but not in > > > mmotm. > > > > Mathieu, > > > > With this patchset, a `make defconfig' results in: > > > > CONFIG_OPROFILE=y > > CONFIG_HAVE_OPROFILE=y > > CONFIG_KPROBES=y > > CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES=y > > > > You probably also need to change the defconfigs... > > Nevermind. If the intention is to key off the build based on CONFIG_<FOO> > and have the CONFIG_HAVE_<FOO> settings just to make the config simpler, > this change is fine. The side effect is just that the CONFIG_HAVE_<FOO> > will still have default settings even when CONFIG_<FOO> is not set. > On x86_32, a diff between defconfig before and after the patchset : 97a98,103 > CONFIG_PROFILING=y > # CONFIG_MARKERS is not set > CONFIG_OPROFILE=y > CONFIG_HAVE_OPROFILE=y > CONFIG_KPROBES=y > CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES=y 1401,1405d1406 < CONFIG_INSTRUMENTATION=y < CONFIG_PROFILING=y < CONFIG_OPROFILE=y < CONFIG_KPROBES=y < # CONFIG_MARKERS is not set Shows the same result. As you explain in your message, the HAVE_* is just a way to know if the architecture provides a feature. The menu entry is CONFIG_<FOO>, which depends on CONFIG_HAVE_<FOO>, will allow y/n/m selection. Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68 -- 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