linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] fixdep: do not ignore kconfig.h

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: <CAK7LNASc1scA3PTGeaMxeRjzyUFZoFgudvBMDyrULOkrjUWGBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 18:38:32 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Cc:     Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fixdep: do not ignore kconfig.h

2018-03-05 17:15 GMT+09:00 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>:
> On 5 March 2018 at 05:52, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
>> 2018-03-01 4:17 GMT+09:00 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>:
>>> kconfig.h was excluded from consideration by fixdep by
>>> 6a5be57f0f00 (fixdep: fix extraneous dependencies) to avoid some false
>>> positive hits
> [...]
>>> We've already had one case [2] where the lack of include/linux/kconfig.h in
>>> the .o.cmd file caused a missing rebuild,
> [...]
>>> [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/22/838
>>
>>
>> Sorry, I missed to include this series in the Kbuild fixes PR
>> I sent two days ago.
>>
>> I was not tracking the randomize-struct thread.
>> I read [2] and I noticed the background of this series just now.
>>
>> Hopefully, I will have another opportunity of PR
>> if this series is necessary for v4.16  (seems so)
>
> I should probably have put 3/3 first, if that is 4.16 material, the
> other two can obviously wait for 4.17. They don't really depend on
> each other apart from overlapping context, and the above commit
> message would need slight rewording if put before the others. I can do
> that reordering and resend if you wish.
>
> Rasmus

1/3 is obviously safe, 2/3 too.
I think the current series is OK for v4.16.
I will queue it up to the fixes branch shortly.

Thanks!




-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada