linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 01/25] scsi/atari_scsi: Don't select CONFIG

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]

Date:   Sun, 30 Dec 2018 07:54:24 +1300
From:   Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...il.com>
To:     LEROY Christophe <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/25] scsi/atari_scsi: Don't select CONFIG_NVRAM

Christophe,

Am 30.12.2018 um 05:55 schrieb LEROY Christophe:
> Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...il.com> a écrit :
>
>> Hi Finn,
>>
>> Am 29.12.2018 um 14:06 schrieb Finn Thain:
>>> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018, LEROY Christophe wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/atari_scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/atari_scsi.c
>>>>> index 89f5154c40b6..99e5729d910d 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/atari_scsi.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/atari_scsi.c
>>>>> @@ -755,9 +755,10 @@ static int __init atari_scsi_probe(struct
>>>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>     if (ATARIHW_PRESENT(TT_SCSI) && setup_sg_tablesize >= 0)
>>>>>         atari_scsi_template.sg_tablesize = setup_sg_tablesize;
>>>>>
>>>>> -    if (setup_hostid >= 0) {
>>>>> +    if (setup_hostid >= 0)
>>>>>         atari_scsi_template.this_id = setup_hostid & 7;
>>>>> -    } else {
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NVRAM
>>>>> +    else
>>>>
>>>> Such ifdefs should be avoided in C files.
>>>> It would be better to use
>>>>
>>>> } else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NVRAM)) {
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't like #ifdefs either. However, as the maintainer of this file,
>>> I am
>>> okay with this one.
>>>
>>> The old #ifdef CONFIG_NVRAM conditional compilation convention that gets
>>> used here and under drivers/video/fbdev could probably be improved upon
>>> but I consider this to be out-of-scope for this series, which is
>>> complicated enough.
>>>
>>> And as explained in the commit log, CONFIG_NVRAM=y and CONFIG_NVRAM=m
>>> are
>>> treaded differently by drivers. Therefore, IS_ENABLED would be
>>> incorrect.
>>
>> IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_NVRAM) is probably what Christophe really meant to
>> suggest.
>
> Doesn't #ifdef means either y or m ? So the same as IS_ENABLED() ?

#ifdef CONFIG_NVRAM is used if you want to match CONFIG_NVRAM=y. For 
CONFIG_NVRAM=m, you'd use #ifdef CONFIG_NVRAM_MODULE.

Cheers,

	Michael


>
> Christophe
>
>>
>> Or (really going out on a limb here):
>>
>> IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_NVRAM) ||
>> ( IS_MODULE(CONFIG_ATARI_SCSI) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NVRAM) )
>>
>> Not that I'd advocate that, for this series.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>     Michael
>
>