linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] serdev: fix builds with CONFIG_SERIAL_DEV

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: <20191218092958.tu6n452zwbpkreks@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Wed, 18 Dec 2019 10:29:58 +0100
From:   Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serdev: fix builds with CONFIG_SERIAL_DEV_BUS=m

On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 10:06:06AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 09:38:42AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Commit 54edb425346a ("serdev: simplify Makefile") broke builds with
> > serdev configured as module. I don't understand it completely yet, but
> > it seems that
> > 
> > 	obj-$(CONFIG_SERIAL_DEV_BUS) += serdev/
> > 
> > in drivers/tty/Makefile with CONFIG_SERIAL_DEV_BUS=m doesn't result in
> > code that is added using obj-y in drivers/tty/serdev/Makefile being
> > compiled. So instead of dropping $(CONFIG_SERIAL_DEV_BUS) in serdev's
> > Makefile, drop it in drivers/tty/Makefile.
> 
> Why not simply revert the offending patch? There are some dependencies
> here related to how the tty layer is built. If you're still not certain
> on why things broke, I suggest just reverting for now.

I see that it is not easy to define what obj-y should do in a Makefile
that is included via obj-m. Now it is the other way round and that
should be safe. This construct is used in several places, so I'd say the
patch is fine unless you have more concrete concerns.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |