linux-kernel - Re: ARM defconfig files

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, 03 Jun 2010 16:20:02 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>
To:	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ARM defconfig files

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 12:49:58PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > So your saying it would drop all the selects, but keep the selected
> > options in tact? Or it would just turn off all the selected options?
> 
> config MACH_HALIBUT
> 	bool "Halibut Board (QCT SURF7201A)"
> 	select I2C if STD_CONFIG
> 	select I2C_WHATEVER if STD_CONFIG
> 	...
> 
> That means if you enable STD_CONFIG, you'll get everything that's required
> selected.  If you then disable STD_CONFIG, I believe Kconfig leaves
> everything that was selected as still being selected.
> 
> So, what you _could_ do is start off with a blank configuration, then
> configure a kernel with STD_CONFIG enabled and you end up with everything
> that's required.  If you then want to disable something that's selected,
> turn off STD_CONFIG first, and you'll be able to turn off individual
> options.

I think this certainly makes sense, at least as a proof of concept.  If 
we end up with lots of 

	select XYZ if STD_CONFIG

then at that point it might be a good idea to introduce some variations 
in the Kconfig language directly.  Something like a multi-priority 
select statement that would either:

- provide the minimum amount of choice to the user and forcefully 
  "select" a default set of options expected to enable all features of 
  the target hardware, or

- let the user see the "preselected" options with a chance to turn it 
  off, but provide a y by default right away, or

- ignore those "preselect" statement entirely, as some expert mode.

Of course the 2nd and 3rd options wouldn't necessarily mean an optimal 
or even working kernel configuration would be produced.


Nicolas
--
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/