linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/6] Regressions for "imply" behavior change

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: <834c7606743424c64951dd2193ca15e29799bf18.camel@mellanox.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 03:25:21 +0000
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
To:     "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>
CC:     "narmstrong@...libre.com" <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        "masahiroy@...nel.org" <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        "Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com" 
        <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        "leon@...nel.org" <leon@...nel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "nico@...xnic.net" <nico@...xnic.net>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com" 
        <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
        "jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com" <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        "a.hajda@...sung.com" <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        "jonas@...boo.se" <jonas@...boo.se>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "airlied@...ux.ie" <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        "jgg@...pe.ca" <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        "jernej.skrabec@...l.net" <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] Regressions for "imply" behavior change

On Tue, 2020-04-14 at 20:47 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 7:49 PM Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-04-14 at 17:25 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 5:23 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
> > > wrote:
> > > Correct.
> > > 
> > 
> > Great !
> > 
> > Then bottom line we will change mlx5/Kconfig: to
> > 
> > depends on VXLAN || !VXLAN
> 
> Ok
> 

BTW how about adding a new Kconfig option to hide the details of 
( BAR || !BAR) ? as Jason already explained and suggested, this will
make it easier for the users and developers to understand the actual
meaning behind this tristate weird condition.

e.g have a new keyword:
     reach VXLAN
which will be equivalent to: 
     depends on VXLAN && !VXLAN

> > This will force MLX5_CORE to m when necessary to make vxlan
> > reachable
> > to mlx5_core.  So no need for explicit use of IS_REACHABLE().
> > in mlx5 there are 4 of these:
> > 
> >         imply PTP_1588_CLOCK
> >         imply VXLAN
> >         imply MLXFW
> >         imply PCI_HYPERV_INTERFACE
> 
> As mentioned earlier, we do need to replace the 'imply
> PTP_1588_CLOCK'
> with the same
> 
>          depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK || !PTP_1588_CLOCK
> 
> So far I have not seen problems for the other two options, so I
> assume they
> are fine for now -- it seems to build just fine without
> PCI_HYPERV_INTERFACE,
> and MLXFW has no other dependencies, meaning that 'imply' is the
> same as 'select' here. Using 'select MLXFW' would make it clearer
> perhaps.

No, I would like to avoid select and allow building mlx5 without MLXFW,
MLXFW already has a stub protected with IS_REACHABLE(), this is why we
don't have an issue with it.


> 
>       Arnd