linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/xe/vsec: enforce CONFIG_INTEL

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: <Z2HVqlvldbgZhH-v@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 14:48:58 -0500
From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, "David E. Box"
	<david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, <michael.j.ruhl@...el.com>, "Lucas De
 Marchi" <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>, Thomas Hellström
	<thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>, Maarten Lankhorst
	<maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
	Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, "David E. Box"
	<david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>, Ilpo Järvinen
	<ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>, Andy Shevchenko
	<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>, Tejas Upadhyay
	<tejas.upadhyay@...el.com>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
	<intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe/vsec: enforce CONFIG_INTEL_VSEC dependency

On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 08:28:59PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2024, at 19:52, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 08:18:44AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> >> 
> >> When INTEL_VSEC is in a loadable module, XE cannot be built-in any more:
> >> 
> >> x86_64-linux-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `xe_vsec_init':
> >> (.text+0x19861bf): undefined reference to `intel_vsec_register'
> >> 
> >> This could be enforced using a 'depends on INTEL_VSEC || !INTEL_VSEC'
> >> style dependency to allow building with VSEC completely disabled.
> >> My impression here is that this was not actually intended, and that
> >> continuing to support that combination would lead to more build bugs.
> >> 
> >> Instead, make it a hard dependency as all other INTEL_VSEC users are,
> >> and remove the inline stub alternative. This leads to a dependency
> >> on CONFIG_X86_PLATFORM_DEVICES, so the 'select' has to be removed
> >> to avoid a circular dependency.
> >> 
> >
> > I really don't want us to hard lock this X86 dependency here.
> > What if we add a new DRM_XE_DGFX_PMT_SUPPORT and that
> > depends on INTEL_VSEC ?
> 
> Yes, that should work if it gets phrased correctly.
> Something like
> 
> config DRM_XE_DGFX_PMT_SUPPORT
>        bool "X86 PMT support"

I'd say bool "Enable PMT support for Intel DGFX"

the X86 PMT sounds more the cpu package pmt which is enabled out of Xe scope

hmm, I'm thinking we shouldn't also add
depends on CONFIG_INTEL_PMT_TELEMETRY

Dave, thoughts?

Cc: David E. Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>

>        depends on DRM_XE && INTEL_VSEC
>        depends on DRM_XE=m || INTEL_VSEC=y
>        depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST

and also
	default y

> 
> 
> 
>      Arnd