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: <CAKYAXd_HAv5+kg26tGLZcDHWmD2MoQFFTwoDtFuvsqgZTcPJwA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:55:08 +0900
From:	NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
To:	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>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Subject: Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next: Tree
 for Oct 11 (mmc))

2011/10/12 Andrei Warkentin <awarkentin@...are.com>:
> Hi,
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "NamJae Jeon" <linkinjeon@...il.com>
>> To: "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>, "Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 8:16:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next: Tree for Oct 11 (mmc))
>>
>> 2011/10/12 Andrei Warkentin <awarkentin@...are.com>:
>> > ----- 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.
>> yes, you're right, I found it after sending mail. If so, should I
>> wrap
>> CONFIG_MMC_BLOCK instead of CONFIG_MMC ? After I add CONFIG_MMC_BLOCK
>> in core/mmc.c, card.h, I can see compile is okay.
>> Thanks.
>> >
>
> I am not sure if it should be CONFIG_MMC_BLOCK or CONFIG_BLOCK. After all, the
> code you're wrapping doesn't really depend on CONFIG_MMC_BLOCK, it gets consumed by it, and
> it depends (in using that one define) only on CONFIG_BLOCK. Maybe I'm overthinking it
> and the code should just define it's own MAX_MMC_PART_NAME to be like 10 or something.
yes, I agree your opinion,  If we define it is easy to solve.
I will send new patch for it today.
Thanks.
>
> 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/