linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] serial: 8250: SERIAL_8250_FSL should not default to y when compile-testing

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: <YUMJk6VKI40Caq5x@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Sep 2021 11:08:35 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>,
        "open list:SERIAL DRIVERS" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: 8250: SERIAL_8250_FSL should not default to y
 when compile-testing

On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:55:49AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Johan,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 10:46 AM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 02:56:52PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > Commit b1442c55ce8977aa ("serial: 8250: extend compile-test coverage")
> > > added compile-test support to the Freescale 16550 driver.  However, as
> > > SERIAL_8250_FSL is an invisible symbol, merely enabling COMPILE_TEST now
> > > enables this driver.
> > >
> > > Fix this by making SERIAL_8250_FSL visible.  Tighten the dependencies to
> > > prevent asking the user about this driver when configuring a kernel
> > > without appropriate Freescale SoC or ACPI support.
> >
> > This tightening is arguable a separate change which risk introducing
> > regressions if you get it wrong and should go in a separate patch at
> > least.
> 
> Getting it wrong would indeed be a regression, but not tightening
> that at the same time would mean I have to send a separate patch with
> a Fixes tag referring to this fix, following this template:
> 
>     foo should depend on bar
> 
>     The foo hardware is only present on bar SoCs.  Hence add a
>     dependency on bar, to prevent asking the user about this driver
>     when configuring a kernel without bar support.

I know this is a pet peeve of yours, but asking users about one more
symbol when configuring their kernels is hardly something that requires
a Fixes tag.

Either way it's a pretty weak argument for not separating the change.

Johan