linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 15 (vdpa)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200416082248-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 08:32:24 -0400
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 15 (vdpa)

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 12:07:06PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2020/4/16 上午12:16, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On 4/14/20 10:22 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Changes since 20200414:
> > > 
> > on x86_64:
> > 
> > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_set_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_init_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_iov_push_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_iov_pull_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_complete_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined!
> > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_getdesc_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined!
> > 
> > 
> > Full randconfig file is attached.
> > 
> 
> The config has
> 
> CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=m
> CONFIG_VHOST_RING=y
> 
> But we don't select VHOST_IOTLB in VHOST_RING after commit
> e6faeaa128417("vhost: drop vring dependency on iotlb"). Which seems wrong.
> 
> Thanks

Well selecting IOTLB from ring breaks configs which don't need IOTLB.

Legal configurations are:

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=y
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=n

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=m
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=n

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=n
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=n

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=y
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=y

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=n
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=y

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=n
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=m

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=y
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=m

CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=m
CONFIG_VHOST_RING=m


So VHOST_RING=y and VHOST_IOTLB=m is the only illegal one.


-- 
MST