linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/build: use the proper name CONFIG_FW

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: <YcxtvObu4Uofn208@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Dec 2021 15:16:28 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/build: use the proper name CONFIG_FW_LOADER

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:15:53PM +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> Commit c8dcf655ec81 ("x86/build: Tuck away built-in firmware under
> FW_LOADER") intends to add the expression regex only when FW_LOADER is
> built-in, not a module or disabled.
> 
> The config is called CONFIG_FW_LOADER when it is built-in; and
> CONFIG_FW_LOADER_MODULE when it is a module.
> 
> So, adjust the condition to the actual name of the config.
> 
> Fixes: c8dcf655ec81 ("x86/build: Tuck away built-in firmware under FW_LOADER")
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
> ---
> 
> I am wondering if this regular expression needs to be made differently
> depending on the build configuration at all.
> 
> Could this not just be added unconditionally anyway or is not needed at all?
> It seems that is was broken since its initial inclusion and nobody ever noticed.

Very few people use built-in firmware, which is why no one probably ever
noticed this :(

Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>