linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] configfs: change depends -> select SYSFS

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1295302216.22813.212.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
Date:	Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:10:16 -0800
From:	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
To:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] configfs: change depends -> select SYSFS

On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 10:24 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:05:54 -0800 Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 18:22 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:

<SNIP>

> > > This is what I don't understand.
> > > 
> > > Actually I think the whole premise of the patch (to get back to the
> > > original topic) is wrong.
> > > 
> > > TARGET_CORE depends on SCSI; SCSI has to have sysfs to survive ... we
> > > just don't work without it yet we neither select nor depend on it.
> > > SYSFS is only deselectable for embedded anyway, so I think the
> > > configuration which generated this whole argument was likely a bogus one
> > > and consequently, none of the patches are needed (or if they are,
> > > they're the tip of the iceberg).
> > > 
> > 
> > This sounds fine for TARGET_CORE, but would still leave GFS2_FS with an
> > unmet direct dependency according to the original warning above.
> > Unfortuately I do not recall which exactly linux-next build
> > configuration was causing this warning to occur from the original post:
> > 
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-next&m=129355383112997&w=2
> > 
> > Any more thoughts here Randy..?
> 
> 
> I've looked at GFS2 a bit now and I think that the warning is bogus:
> 
> kconfig complains with:
> warning: (TARGET_CORE && GFS2_FS) selects CONFIGFS_FS which has unmet direct dependencies (SYSFS)
> 
> but the "select" is conditional:
> config GFS2_FS
> 	tristate "GFS2 file system support"
> 	depends on (64BIT || LBDAF)
> 	select DLM if GFS2_FS_LOCKING_DLM
> 	select CONFIGFS_FS if GFS2_FS_LOCKING_DLM
> 	select SYSFS if GFS2_FS_LOCKING_DLM
> 
> and the same condition selects both SYSFS and CONFIGFS_FS.  Furthermore, the
> conditional is not true, so neither of them is being selected/enabled.
> Looks like a minor kconfig buglet to me.
> 

Ok, so Linus has pulled the CONFIGFS_FS -> select SYSFS series and it
looks like this 'select SYSFS ...' bit for GFS2_FS can safely be dropped
now..

Care to carry this one via your kbuild tree..?

Thanks!

--nab


--
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/