linux-kernel - Re: Documentation of kconfig language differs from implementation regarding existence of symbols

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <201210112244.07609.yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
Date:	Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:44:07 +0200
From:	"Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@...e.fr>
To:	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, Martin Walch <walch.martin@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Documentation of kconfig language differs from implementation regarding existence of symbols

Michal, Martin, All,

On Thursday 11 October 2012 22:27:36 Michal Marek wrote:
> Dne 10.10.2012 02:17, Martin Walch napsal(a):
> > The file linux/Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt says:
> > 
> >> The following two methods produce the same kconfig symbol
> >> dependencies but differ greatly in kconfig symbol existence
> >> (production) in the generated config file.
> >> 
> >> case 1:
> >> 
> >> config FOO tristate "about foo" depends on BAR
> >> 
> >> vs. case 2:
> >> 
> >> if BAR config FOO tristate "about foo" endif
> >> 
> >> In case 1, the symbol FOO will always exist in the config file
> >> (given no other dependencies).  In case 2, the symbol FOO will
> >> only exist in the config file if BAR is enabled.
> > 
> > However, I can not reproduce this. The attached file contains both
> > cases. When running make menuconfig, setting BAR0 and BAR1 both to
> > n, and saving the configuration, there is neither FOO0 nor FOO1 in
> > the resulting configuration file.
> 
> Indeed, that paragraph seems wrong. I think we should revert commit
> 64b81ed. Randy, Arnaud?

I just tested with Martin's example, and:
  - indeed, both symbols appear as "is not set",
  - that paragraph was already wrong for Kconfig at #64b81ed.

Before we trim that paragraph away, what's the purpose of the expected
difference in behavior for the two constructs?

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
--
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/