[PATCH 02/14] lmb: Use CONFIG_LMB_*_REGIONS only if they are defined

[Marek Vasut]

On 9/4/21 5:17 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 05:15:45PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 9/4/21 4:10 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>>>>>> At this point, I think you should rework things to stop making
>>>>>>> CONFIG_LMB be optional, it should be a def_bool y.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I disagree, see above.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only reason "tools-only_defconfig" builds a useless u-boot binary
>>>>> today is in CI where it would be more work than it's worth to make CI
>>>>> exclude that from the build list.  But if you want to just do that
>>>>> instead, I'll also accept adding -x tools-only to the azure/gitlab jobs
>>>>> that build all other architectures, as tools-only is tested in its own
>>>>> build job, for it's only valid build target.
>>>>
>>>> The tools-only build is also used elsewhere, to build just that, tools.
>>>
>>> I've repeatedly explained myself and what I'm looking for in v2 of this
>>> series.  I will summarize one last time.  The "tools-only_defconfig" is
>>> for tools, only.  Building anything other than the "tools-only" target
>>> isn't useful.  In U-Boot itself, LMB is required as that is how we
>>> prevent a number of CVEs from being trivial to exploit.  v2 of this
>>> series needs to drop patches 1 and 2 of v1 of this series.  It can
>>> further do any of:
>>> 1. Nothing else.
>>> 2. Add tools-only to the exclude list in the "build everything else" CI
>>>      job.
>>> 3. Make CONFIG_LMB be def_bool y.
>>
>> If tools-only is for tools, only, then why should it enable LMB ?
>> The tools are userspace tools, they do not need LMB, and so LMB can be
>> disabled.
>>
>> This is the part which is unclear to me.
> 
> I don't know why it's unclear to you at this point, sorry.

Well why exactly does a userspace program require LMB enabled ?
What does LMB protect in there ? obviously not U-Boot.