linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: core: Fix link error when CONFIG

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: <a2addffc-6f7a-4313-a8a4-dbce2a18a2cb@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2025 16:47:22 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Bean Huo" <beanhuo@...pp.de>,
 "Jens Wiklander" <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>
Cc: "Bart Van Assche" <bvanassche@....org>,
 "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>, avri.altman@...disk.com,
 "Alim Akhtar" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
 "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, can.guo@....qualcomm.com,
 "Bean Huo" <beanhuo@...ron.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "kernel test robot" <lkp@...el.com>,
 "Ulf Hansson" <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: core: Fix link error when CONFIG_RPMB=m

On Tue, Dec 2, 2025, at 15:59, Bean Huo wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-12-02 at 14:25 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2025, at 14:17, Jens Wiklander wrote:
>> > > > > > 
>> > > > > >   config RPMB
>> > > > > > -       tristate "RPMB partition interface"
>> > > > > > +       bool "RPMB partition interface"
>> > > > > >         depends on MMC || SCSI_UFSHCD
>> > > > > >         help
>> > > > > >           Unified RPMB unit interface for RPMB capable devices such
>> > > > > > as
>> 
>> This equally does not seem appropriate, as others have commented.
>> 
>
> the qeustions do we need to make RPMB as a module?

I think generally speaking, yes: Everything that can be made a
loadable module should be configurable that way.

>> > What will that mean for OPTEE and MMC? That they can't be modules if
>> > RPMB is enabled? Are we moving the problem somewhere else?
>> 
>> My first impression is that the 'depends on MMC || SCSI_UFSHCD' is
>> the problem here, and I would suggest simply dropping that dependency.
>> 
>
>> Any module that links against exported RPMB symbols should have
>> the 'depends on RPMB || !RPMB' line to enable linking correctly.
>> The RPMB implementation in drivers/misc on the other hand has no
>> link-time dependency I can see, and enabling it without one of
>> the other symbols simply means that there is a module that does
>> nothing.
>
> I have added this option in my previous email, can you add which one you prefer.

You suggested:
 "1. Make RPMB not directly depend on SCSI_UFSHCD in Kconfig then,
   Use "depends on RPMB || !RPMB" in SCSI_UFSHCD (like MMC does)"

but I think we should go a step further and remove the
'depends on MMC' as well for consistency. Otherwise you create
a dependency chain that makes it impossible to have UFSHCD
built-in if MMC is a loadable module.

    Arnd