linux-kernel - Re: on builds/randconfigs (was: [PATCH -next] thermal: depends on NET)

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]

Message-ID: <AANLkTikJjg330KDvOZZ4agg2dZV6np-rW06=PEuZRSPa@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Jan 2011 20:08:42 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Zimny Lech <napohybelskurwysynom2010@...il.com>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: on builds/randconfigs (was: [PATCH -next] thermal: depends on NET)

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 22:45:40 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>>
>> What happens if you have foo depends on bar || fib ?
>>
>> Do you automatically enable bar and fib?
>
> The plan was to error out and let the user decide ... or behave as we do
> and just warn?

One thing to notice is that a lot of the "a || b" conditionals tend to
be cases where one of the expressions is a known constant 'y'.

In other words, the most common case of "a || b" tends to be things
like "X86 || MIPS || POWER.." or possibly "PCI || ISA", where one of
the options will have been hard-coded by the initial architecture
config file - and would generally not be something that the user sets
at all.

Now that may not be _universally_ true, but a quick grep certainly
supports the notion that that is a very common case.

So I think we want the rule to be:

 - check all entries in the "||" chain - and if one of them is already
set to 'y', then just ignore the dependency as trivially fulfilled

 - if all are 'n' or unknown, error out (or warn)

and I think there won't be all that many cases where people get the
error in practice.

                      Linus
--
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/