linux-kernel - Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next: Tree for Oct 11 (mmc))

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: <1484494934.58546.1318376933037.JavaMail.root@zimbra-prod-mbox-2.vmware.com>
Date:	Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Andrei Warkentin <awarkentin@...are.com>
To:	NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Subject: Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next:
 Tree for Oct 11 (mmc))

----- Original Message -----
> From: "NamJae Jeon" <linkinjeon@...il.com>
> To: "Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>, "Andrei Warkentin" <awarkentin@...are.com>
> Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, "LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, "Chris Ball"
> <cjb@...top.org>, "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 7:20:48 PM
> Subject: Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next: Tree for Oct 11 (mmc))
> 
> Hi Randy, Andrei.
> 
> I suggest third option for this.
> As you know, MMC like ATA Driver and SCSI Driver etc.. can not enable
> without CONFIG_BLOCK
> So I think that mmc should be depended from CONFIG_BLOCK like other
> block device driver.
> see the their Kconfig. How do you think ?

MMC core doesn't not imply MMC_BLOCK. You could well use SDIO devices via MMC without any flash storage whatsoever.
What I want to say is that MMC_BLOCK already depends on BLOCK. MMC, however, has no such functional dependence, as it
just (effectively) provides bus and device enumeration. So I think the better solution is wrapping all MMC partition
code within mmc/core/mmc.c and card.h with CONFIG_BLOCK.

A
--
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/