linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] scsi: Define MODULE_DEVICE

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: <aDW25htH2tMzqtqH@example.org>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 14:58:14 +0200
From: Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Cc: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
	Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas.schier@...ux.dev>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, Khalid Aziz <khalid@...ehiking.org>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] scsi: Define MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE only if necessary

On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 07:58:27AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-05-27 at 13:54 +0200, Alexey Gladkov wrote:
> > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 07:28:59AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2025-05-27 at 11:07 +0200, Alexey Gladkov wrote:
> > > > Define MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE only if a structure is defined for it.
> > > > 
> > > > drivers/scsi/BusLogic.c:3735:26: error: use of undeclared
> > > > identifier
> > > > 'blogic_pci_tbl'
> > > >  3735 | MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, blogic_pci_tbl);
> > > 
> > > Well, a) need to cc the scsi list
> > 
> > Sorry. I miss it.
> > 
> > > and b) how is this possible when MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() has an empty
> > > definition if MODULE isn't defined (so the guard you move should be
> > > over an empty statement)?
> > 
> > In the next patch:
> > 
> > [PATCH v3 4/6] modpost: Create modalias for builtin modules
> > 
> > I remove this condition for the MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE macro and it will
> > be always defined.
> 
> Well, why?  If there's a reason for the table to always exist, wouldn't
> the best fix then be to remove the module guards from the PCI table in
> the buslogic ... they only really exist to prevent a defined but not
> used error which it sounds like you're getting rid of?

I wanted to keep the original logic and remove the build error. Before my
changes blogic_pci_tbl was only used when the module was built separately
(MODULE case).

But yes, you are right. In this case, it would be more appropriate to
remove the MODULE condition at all since MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE always
makes sense after my changes.

-- 
Rgrds, legion