linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: boot test failure (net tree)

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: <CACqU3MW4BnucRt3gxPrKPDvWEjaVuxRF1VOPWk5hTRfneyANkg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Aug 2011 23:50:02 -0400
From:	Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	sfr@...b.auug.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, mikey@...ling.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	paulus@...ba.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: boot test failure (net tree)

Hi,

[Added linux-kbuild@ to the Cc: list.]

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:13 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:41:29 +1000
>
>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:40:11 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 11:30:32 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Here's what I am applying as a merge fixup to the net tree today so that
>>> > my ppc64_defconfig builds actually build more or less the same set of
>>> > drivers as before this rearrangement.
>>>
>>> And this today:
>>
>> And this:
>
> I'm starting to get uncomfortable with this whole situation, and I
> feel more and more that these new kconfig guards are not tenable.
>
> Changing defconfig files might fix the "automated test boot with
> defconfig" case but it won't fix the case of someone trying to
> automate a build and boot using a different, existing, config file.
> It ought to work too, and I do know people really do this.
>
> And just the fact that we would have to merge all of these defconfig changes
> through the networking tree is evidence of how it's really not reasonable
> to be doing things this way.
>
> Jeff, I think we need to revert the dependencies back to what they were
> before the drivers/net moves.  Could you prepare a patch which does that?
>
Are you implying we need some kind of way to migrate config ?

 - Arnaud
--
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/