linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] selftests/nolibc: support out-of-tree builds

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2023 18:09:59 +0200 (GMT+02:00)
From:   Thomas Weißschuh  <thomas@...ch.de>
To:     Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Zhangjin Wu <falcon@...ylab.org>
Cc:     Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] selftests/nolibc: support out-of-tree builds

Oct 22, 2023 11:31:32 Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>:

> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 02:33:59PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
>> Out of tree builds are much more convenient when building for multiple
>> architectures or configurations in parallel.
>>
>> Only absolute O= parameters are supported as Makefile.include will
>> always resolve relative paths in relation to $(srctree) instead of the
>> current directory.
>>
>> Add a call to "make outputmakefile" to verify that the sourcetree is
>> clean.
>
> At first this worried me, I thought you meant clean in the git meaning,
> but it's clean as in "make clean" from what I'm seeing. Yeah that sounds
> reasonable.
>
>> This is based on Zhangjins out-of-tree patch.
>> It extends that work for get_init_cpio support and also drops relative
>> O= specifications explicitly.
>
> Yeah I remember these discussions about these shortcomings, that's
> pretty reasonable.
>
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/06d96bd81fe812a9718098a383678ad3beba98b1.1691215074.git.falcon@tinylab.org/
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
> (...)
>
> I think you should add a Suggested-by at least since Zhangjin attempted
> that work quite a few times already and allowed to make progress in that
> direction (maybe even co-developed, I'm not sure).

Indeed. For a proper Co-developed-by I also need
a Signed-off-by by Zhangjin.

Zhangjin, are you fine with giving me one for this
patch?

> Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>

Thanks!