* [PATCH] kbuild: do not check name uniqueness of builtin modules
@ 2019-05-20 2:54 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-05-20 2:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kbuild
Cc: Sam Ravnborg, Arnd Bergmann, Greg KH, Jessica Yu,
Lucas De Marchi, Stephen Rothwell, Michael Schmitz,
Linus Torvalds, Rusty Russell, Kees Cook, linux-kernel,
linuxppc-dev, Michael Ellerman, Masahiro Yamada, Lucas De Marchi
I just thought it was a good idea to scan builtin.modules in the name
uniqueness checking, but Stephen reported a false positive.
ppc64_defconfig produces:
warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:
arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/nvram.ko
drivers/char/nvram.ko
..., which is a false positive because the former is never built as
a module as you see in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/Makefile:
# CONFIG_NVRAM is an arch. independent tristate symbol, for pmac32 we really
# need this to be a bool. Cheat here and pretend CONFIG_NVRAM=m is really
# CONFIG_NVRAM=y
obj-$(CONFIG_NVRAM:m=y) += nvram.o
Since we cannot predict how tricky Makefiles are written in wild,
builtin.modules may potentially contain false positives. I do not
think it is a big deal as far as kmod is concerned, but false positive
warnings in the kernel build makes people upset. It is better to not
do it.
Even without checking builtin.modules, we have enough (and more solid)
test coverage with allmodconfig.
While I touched this part, I replaced the sed code with neater one
provided by Stephen.
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/120
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/123
Fixes: 3a48a91901c5 ("kbuild: check uniqueness of module names")
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
---
scripts/modules-check.sh | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/modules-check.sh b/scripts/modules-check.sh
index 2f659530e1ec..39e8cb36ba19 100755
--- a/scripts/modules-check.sh
+++ b/scripts/modules-check.sh
@@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ set -e
# Check uniqueness of module names
check_same_name_modules()
{
- for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order modules.builtin | sort | uniq -d)
+ for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order | sort | uniq -d)
do
- echo "warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:" >&2
- sed "/\/$m/!d;s:^kernel/: :" modules.order modules.builtin >&2
+ echo "warning: same module names found:" >&2
+ sed -n "/\/$m/s:^kernel/: :p" modules.order >&2
done
}
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] kbuild: do not check name uniqueness of builtin modules
@ 2019-05-20 2:54 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-05-20 2:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kbuild
Cc: Michael Schmitz, Stephen Rothwell, linuxppc-dev, Kees Cook,
Arnd Bergmann, Masahiro Yamada, Greg KH, Rusty Russell,
Lucas De Marchi, linux-kernel, Lucas De Marchi, Linus Torvalds,
Jessica Yu, Sam Ravnborg
I just thought it was a good idea to scan builtin.modules in the name
uniqueness checking, but Stephen reported a false positive.
ppc64_defconfig produces:
warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:
arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/nvram.ko
drivers/char/nvram.ko
..., which is a false positive because the former is never built as
a module as you see in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/Makefile:
# CONFIG_NVRAM is an arch. independent tristate symbol, for pmac32 we really
# need this to be a bool. Cheat here and pretend CONFIG_NVRAM=m is really
# CONFIG_NVRAM=y
obj-$(CONFIG_NVRAM:m=y) += nvram.o
Since we cannot predict how tricky Makefiles are written in wild,
builtin.modules may potentially contain false positives. I do not
think it is a big deal as far as kmod is concerned, but false positive
warnings in the kernel build makes people upset. It is better to not
do it.
Even without checking builtin.modules, we have enough (and more solid)
test coverage with allmodconfig.
While I touched this part, I replaced the sed code with neater one
provided by Stephen.
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/120
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/123
Fixes: 3a48a91901c5 ("kbuild: check uniqueness of module names")
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
---
scripts/modules-check.sh | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/modules-check.sh b/scripts/modules-check.sh
index 2f659530e1ec..39e8cb36ba19 100755
--- a/scripts/modules-check.sh
+++ b/scripts/modules-check.sh
@@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ set -e
# Check uniqueness of module names
check_same_name_modules()
{
- for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order modules.builtin | sort | uniq -d)
+ for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order | sort | uniq -d)
do
- echo "warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:" >&2
- sed "/\/$m/!d;s:^kernel/: :" modules.order modules.builtin >&2
+ echo "warning: same module names found:" >&2
+ sed -n "/\/$m/s:^kernel/: :p" modules.order >&2
done
}
--
2.17.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kbuild: do not check name uniqueness of builtin modules
2019-05-20 2:54 ` Masahiro Yamada
@ 2019-05-20 9:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2019-05-20 9:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: Linux Kbuild mailing list, Sam Ravnborg, Greg KH, Jessica Yu,
Lucas De Marchi, Stephen Rothwell, Michael Schmitz,
Linus Torvalds, Rusty Russell, Kees Cook,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, linuxppc-dev, Michael Ellerman,
Lucas De Marchi
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 4:57 AM Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>
> I just thought it was a good idea to scan builtin.modules in the name
> uniqueness checking, but Stephen reported a false positive.
>
> ppc64_defconfig produces:
>
> warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/nvram.ko
> drivers/char/nvram.ko
>
> ..., which is a false positive because the former is never built as
> a module as you see in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/Makefile:
>
> # CONFIG_NVRAM is an arch. independent tristate symbol, for pmac32 we really
> # need this to be a bool. Cheat here and pretend CONFIG_NVRAM=m is really
> # CONFIG_NVRAM=y
> obj-$(CONFIG_NVRAM:m=y) += nvram.o
>
> Since we cannot predict how tricky Makefiles are written in wild,
> builtin.modules may potentially contain false positives. I do not
> think it is a big deal as far as kmod is concerned, but false positive
> warnings in the kernel build makes people upset. It is better to not
> do it.
>
> Even without checking builtin.modules, we have enough (and more solid)
> test coverage with allmodconfig.
>
> While I touched this part, I replaced the sed code with neater one
> provided by Stephen.
>
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/120
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/123
> Fixes: 3a48a91901c5 ("kbuild: check uniqueness of module names")
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Looks good to me
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
>
> scripts/modules-check.sh | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/modules-check.sh b/scripts/modules-check.sh
> index 2f659530e1ec..39e8cb36ba19 100755
> --- a/scripts/modules-check.sh
> +++ b/scripts/modules-check.sh
> @@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ set -e
> # Check uniqueness of module names
> check_same_name_modules()
> {
> - for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order modules.builtin | sort | uniq -d)
> + for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order | sort | uniq -d)
> do
> - echo "warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:" >&2
> - sed "/\/$m/!d;s:^kernel/: :" modules.order modules.builtin >&2
> + echo "warning: same module names found:" >&2
> + sed -n "/\/$m/s:^kernel/: :p" modules.order >&2
> done
> }
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kbuild: do not check name uniqueness of builtin modules
@ 2019-05-20 9:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2019-05-20 9:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: Michael Schmitz, Stephen Rothwell, linuxppc-dev, Kees Cook,
Linux Kbuild mailing list, Greg KH, Rusty Russell,
Lucas De Marchi, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Lucas De Marchi,
Linus Torvalds, Jessica Yu, Sam Ravnborg
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 4:57 AM Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>
> I just thought it was a good idea to scan builtin.modules in the name
> uniqueness checking, but Stephen reported a false positive.
>
> ppc64_defconfig produces:
>
> warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/nvram.ko
> drivers/char/nvram.ko
>
> ..., which is a false positive because the former is never built as
> a module as you see in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/Makefile:
>
> # CONFIG_NVRAM is an arch. independent tristate symbol, for pmac32 we really
> # need this to be a bool. Cheat here and pretend CONFIG_NVRAM=m is really
> # CONFIG_NVRAM=y
> obj-$(CONFIG_NVRAM:m=y) += nvram.o
>
> Since we cannot predict how tricky Makefiles are written in wild,
> builtin.modules may potentially contain false positives. I do not
> think it is a big deal as far as kmod is concerned, but false positive
> warnings in the kernel build makes people upset. It is better to not
> do it.
>
> Even without checking builtin.modules, we have enough (and more solid)
> test coverage with allmodconfig.
>
> While I touched this part, I replaced the sed code with neater one
> provided by Stephen.
>
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/120
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/123
> Fixes: 3a48a91901c5 ("kbuild: check uniqueness of module names")
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Looks good to me
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
>
> scripts/modules-check.sh | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/modules-check.sh b/scripts/modules-check.sh
> index 2f659530e1ec..39e8cb36ba19 100755
> --- a/scripts/modules-check.sh
> +++ b/scripts/modules-check.sh
> @@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ set -e
> # Check uniqueness of module names
> check_same_name_modules()
> {
> - for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order modules.builtin | sort | uniq -d)
> + for m in $(sed 's:.*/::' modules.order | sort | uniq -d)
> do
> - echo "warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:" >&2
> - sed "/\/$m/!d;s:^kernel/: :" modules.order modules.builtin >&2
> + echo "warning: same module names found:" >&2
> + sed -n "/\/$m/s:^kernel/: :p" modules.order >&2
> done
> }
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kbuild: do not check name uniqueness of builtin modules
2019-05-20 2:54 ` Masahiro Yamada
@ 2019-05-20 9:40 ` Greg KH
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2019-05-20 9:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: linux-kbuild, Sam Ravnborg, Arnd Bergmann, Jessica Yu,
Lucas De Marchi, Stephen Rothwell, Michael Schmitz,
Linus Torvalds, Rusty Russell, Kees Cook, linux-kernel,
linuxppc-dev, Michael Ellerman, Lucas De Marchi
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:54:37AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> I just thought it was a good idea to scan builtin.modules in the name
> uniqueness checking, but Stephen reported a false positive.
>
> ppc64_defconfig produces:
>
> warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/nvram.ko
> drivers/char/nvram.ko
>
> ..., which is a false positive because the former is never built as
> a module as you see in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/Makefile:
>
> # CONFIG_NVRAM is an arch. independent tristate symbol, for pmac32 we really
> # need this to be a bool. Cheat here and pretend CONFIG_NVRAM=m is really
> # CONFIG_NVRAM=y
> obj-$(CONFIG_NVRAM:m=y) += nvram.o
>
> Since we cannot predict how tricky Makefiles are written in wild,
> builtin.modules may potentially contain false positives. I do not
> think it is a big deal as far as kmod is concerned, but false positive
> warnings in the kernel build makes people upset. It is better to not
> do it.
>
> Even without checking builtin.modules, we have enough (and more solid)
> test coverage with allmodconfig.
>
> While I touched this part, I replaced the sed code with neater one
> provided by Stephen.
>
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/120
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/123
> Fixes: 3a48a91901c5 ("kbuild: check uniqueness of module names")
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] kbuild: do not check name uniqueness of builtin modules
@ 2019-05-20 9:40 ` Greg KH
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2019-05-20 9:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: Michael Schmitz, Stephen Rothwell, linuxppc-dev, Kees Cook,
Arnd Bergmann, linux-kbuild, Linus Torvalds, Rusty Russell,
Lucas De Marchi, linux-kernel, Lucas De Marchi, Jessica Yu,
Sam Ravnborg
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:54:37AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> I just thought it was a good idea to scan builtin.modules in the name
> uniqueness checking, but Stephen reported a false positive.
>
> ppc64_defconfig produces:
>
> warning: same basename if the following are built as modules:
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/nvram.ko
> drivers/char/nvram.ko
>
> ..., which is a false positive because the former is never built as
> a module as you see in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/Makefile:
>
> # CONFIG_NVRAM is an arch. independent tristate symbol, for pmac32 we really
> # need this to be a bool. Cheat here and pretend CONFIG_NVRAM=m is really
> # CONFIG_NVRAM=y
> obj-$(CONFIG_NVRAM:m=y) += nvram.o
>
> Since we cannot predict how tricky Makefiles are written in wild,
> builtin.modules may potentially contain false positives. I do not
> think it is a big deal as far as kmod is concerned, but false positive
> warnings in the kernel build makes people upset. It is better to not
> do it.
>
> Even without checking builtin.modules, we have enough (and more solid)
> test coverage with allmodconfig.
>
> While I touched this part, I replaced the sed code with neater one
> provided by Stephen.
>
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/120
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/19/123
> Fixes: 3a48a91901c5 ("kbuild: check uniqueness of module names")
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-05-20 9:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-05-20 2:54 [PATCH] kbuild: do not check name uniqueness of builtin modules Masahiro Yamada
2019-05-20 2:54 ` Masahiro Yamada
2019-05-20 9:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-20 9:28 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-20 9:40 ` Greg KH
2019-05-20 9:40 ` Greg KH
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.