linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/14] firmware_loader: add built-in firmware kconfig entry

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: <YW3gae4HoUd9izyj@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 18 Oct 2021 14:00:25 -0700
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     bp@...e.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
        rishabhb@...eaurora.org, kubakici@...pl, maco@...roid.com,
        david.brown@...aro.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org,
        shuah@...nel.org, mfuzzey@...keon.com, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        dhowells@...hat.com, pali.rohar@...il.com, tiwai@...e.de,
        arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com, zajec5@...il.com, nbroeking@...com,
        broonie@...nel.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, Abhay_Salunke@...l.com,
        jewalt@...innovations.com, cantabile.desu@...il.com, ast@...com,
        andresx7@...il.com, dan.rue@...aro.org, brendanhiggins@...gle.com,
        yzaikin@...gle.com, sfr@...b.auug.org.au, rdunlap@...radead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] firmware_loader: add built-in firmware kconfig
 entry

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 03:30:24PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 07:46:04PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > >   o By default we now always skip built-in firmware even if a FW_LOADER=y
> > 
> > I do not understand, why would we ever want to skip built-in firmware?
> 
> Because it is done this way today only implicitly because
> EXTRA_FIRMWARE is empty. Using a kconfig entry makes this
> more obvious.

Greg,

The fact that it was not obvious to you we were effectively disabling
the built-in firmware functionality by default using side kconfig
symbols is a good reason to clarify this situation with its own kconfig
symbol.

And consider what I started below as well.

Please let me know why on the other hand we should *not* add this new
kconfig symbol?

> > >   o This also lets us make it clear that the EXTRA_FIRMWARE_DIR
> > >     kconfig entry is only used for built-in firmware
> > 
> > How was it ever used for anything else?  :)
> 
> Well later this patch set also renames this to something more
> sensible, and so that change is clearer through this patch.
> 
> > I can not take this as-is, so yes :)
> 
> Well please let me know again once you read the above explanations.
> 
> I think the new kconfig is very well justified given the above.
> 
>   Luis