linux-kernel - Re: distributed module configuration

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:	Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:09:56 +0100
From:	"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" <cate@...eee.net>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, greg@...ah.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, jeff@...zik.org,
	arjan@...radead.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: distributed module configuration

Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:54:33AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
>> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:45:41 +0100
>>
>>> So we could do:
>>>
>>> config foo
>>> 	tristate "do you want foo?"
>>> 	depends on USB && BAR
>>> 	module
>>> 	  obj-$(CONFIG_FOO) += foo.o
>>> 	  foo-y := file1.o file2.o
>>> 	help
>>> 	  foo will allow you to explode your PC
>>  ...
>>> Does this fit what you had in mind?
>> Yes it does.
>>
>> Now I'll ask if you think embedding this information in one of the C
>> files for a module would be even nicer?
> I have no good idea for the syntax and I and not sure what is gained
> by reducing a driver with one file.
> Agreed - simple drivers would then be a single file - and thats a good argument.

I like the Sam proposal, but maybe we can simplify the rules on
"module" segment: some informations are often redundant, dependencies
are sometime calculated by config part and sometime by Makefile
(and sometime in the Makefile there are some wrong hacks).
I would really like a good section like:

module
    foo : file1.o file2.o

and let the complex rules in the normal Makefile
(which is also good because the complex rules are often not
specific to a single driver).

But I don't like merging all info in a single file:
- not so clean in case of multiple source-file driver
- it would be more complex the "copy and paste"
   from other drivers: most developers are not
   comfortable with Kconfig and Makefile, so easy to grep
   others Kconfig/Makefile could help developers not do
   do strange/wrong hacks.

ciao
	cate

--
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/