netdev - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the net-next tree

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: <20180719223521.GA30287@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:35:21 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the net-next tree

On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 08:09:06AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
> 
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:49:01 -0700 Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> >
> > On 07/18/2018 10:29 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 20:52:56 -0700 Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:  
> > >>
> > >> On 07/18/2018 07:04 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:  
> > >>>
> > >>> After merging the net-next tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > >>> allmodconfig) produced this warning:
> > >>>
> > >>> *
> > >>> * Restart config...
> > >>> *
> > >>> ....
> > >>>
> > >>> This is output by my "make allmodconfig" and only started after merging
> > >>> the net-next tree today.  It has continued for further merges/builds.
> > >>>
> > >>> I suspect commit
> > >>>
> > >>>     1323061a018a ("net: phy: sfp: Add HWMON support for module sensors")
> > >>>
> > >>> which added an "imply" clause.
> > >>>      
> > >> I thought "imply" was better than "depends on HWMON || HWMON=n", but maybe
> > >> not. Is that a caveat when using "imply", and does it mean that "imply"
> > >> should better not be used ?  
> > > 
> > > I don't know, sorry.  It was just my best guess from what I could see
> > > had changed.
> > > 
> > > I wonder if it makes a difference that I am doing my "make
> > > allmodconfig" on top of a previous "make allmodconfig" and some symbols
> > > are marked as "NEW" (though they are not symbols related to the changes
> > > that happened during the net-next tree merge)?
> > >   
> > 
> > I tried to reproduce the problem, but I don't see the message.
> > 
> > What I do see, though, is that "make allmodconfig" on a clean tree,
> > followed by "make menuconfig", results in configuration changes.
> > Specifically,
> > 
> >  > CONFIG_ARC_EMAC_CORE=m
> >  > CONFIG_ARC_EMAC=m
> >  > CONFIG_EMAC_ROCKCHIP=m  
> > 
> > is removed by menuconfig, and a large number of "# ... is not set"
> > configuration lines are added. Weird and bad, since several of the
> > disabled configurations _should_ be enabled by "make allmodconfig",
> > and a large number of hwmon drivers are affected. Bisect does point
> > to "net: phy: sfp: Add HWMON support for module sensors", meaning
> > "imply hwmon" does have severe side effects and can not be used.
> > 
> > I'll try to find a fix.
> 
> OK, my mistake, the "make allmodconfig" works, the following "make"
> causes the config restart.  (I am actually doing cross builds and using
> an external object directory, in case that matters.)
> 
> I removed the "imply HWMON" line added by the above commit and the
> problem went away.  Also, using "depends on HWMON || HWMON=n" instead
> of the imply fixes it.

Yes, replacing imply with the dependency is what I did in the fixup patch.
Sorry, I should have copied you: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10534925/

It is a bit different - imply was supposed to enforce HWMON={y,n} if SFP=y,
and the depends line enforces SFP={n,m} if HWMON=m. I have no idea why
imply doesn't work, but I think I'll stay away from it in the future.

Guenter