linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] resource, kunit: add dependency on SPARSEMEM

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: <87a5fxtqbl.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:21:18 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Dan Williams
 <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,  Andrew Morton
 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,  <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,  Linus
 Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] resource, kunit: add dependency on SPARSEMEM

Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> writes:

> Hi Huang,
>
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 3:25 AM Huang, Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
>> Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> writes:
>> > On 9/23/24 05:58, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >> Hi Günter,
>> >> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 12:50 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> Building allmodconfig images on systems with SPARSEMEM=n results in
>> >>> the following message.
>> >>>
>> >>> WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for GET_FREE_REGION
>> >>>    Depends on [n]: SPARSEMEM [=n]
>> >>>    Selected by [m]:
>> >>>    - RESOURCE_KUNIT_TEST [=m] && RUNTIME_TESTING_MENU [=y] && KUNIT [=m]
>
>> After Linus' fix for PHYSMEM_END, GET_FREE_REGION doesn't need to depend
>> on SPARSEMEM anymore.  So, I think we can remove the dependency.  Can
>> you check whether the following patch work for you on top of latest
>> upstream kernel (with Linus' fix).
>
> Yes it does, thanks!
>
> One remaining issue is that RESOURCE_KUNIT_TEST selects GET_FREE_REGION.
> IMHO merely enabling a test should not enable extra functionality
> in the kernel.  Can the individual test(s) that do depend on
> GET_FREE_REGION be protected by #ifdef CONFIG_GET_FREE_REGION instead?

After checking GET_FREE_REGION, I don't think that it's a special
functionality.  I guess it's selectable because it depends on SPARSEMEM
and to reduce code size.

Hi, Dan, please correct me if I'm wrong here.

So, to reduce #ifdef in .c file as much as possible and make code
simpler, I prefer to select it for RESOURCE_KUNIT_TEST.

--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying