linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] power: make goldfish option have a dependency on goldfish

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: <20130309011809.GA4028@lizard.sbx05280.losalca.wayport.net>
Date:	Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:18:10 -0800
From:	Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>
To:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] power: make goldfish option have a dependency on goldfish

Hi Paul,

On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:38:41AM -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> > I see. In that case, please feel free to send the patch to akpm with my
> > Nack and pointing to this discussion. If Andrew agrees and I was wrong
> > (and I'm really curious whether I am right or wrong), I will start
> > applying such patches in future.
> 
> I didn't send the patch to akpm, but I did have a chance to ask akpm how
> dependencies should be used, and you can see his answer here:
> 
> 	https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/7/456

Thanks for asking! FWIW, I won't be against CONFIG_AKPM. ;-) Something
like that will work:

	depends on GENERIC_HARDIRQS
	depends on RESTRICT_PLATFORM && GOLDFISH

But not that I think we really need this option, though. Whoever wants to
(re)build the kernel is assumed to be knowledgeable enough to figure out
what needed/unneeded for the given HW. I, for example, use 'ARCH=foo
allnoconfig' for stripped kernels, and then enable specific options which
I know I will need. Distros, however, they are using kind of
'allmodconfig' anyways:

	~$ du -sh /lib/modules/3.8.0-28-desktop/
	148M    /lib/modules/3.8.0-28-desktop/

One module less, one module more does not matter, but maintaining
CONFIG_AKPM will cost devs' time and efforts (especially figuring out what
is platform dep and what is not... I think it is easier to just keep
things simple.

But again, I won't be against it -- at least it doesn't make my life
harder. :-)

Cheers,

Anton
--
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/