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

Marek Vasut marex at denx.de
Sat Sep 4 21:37:39 CEST 2021


On 9/4/21 7:01 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> [trimming the CC list]
> 
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 06:49:03PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 9/4/21 6:09 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 06:05:50PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> I feel like you've lost the thread.
>>
>> Can you please answer my questions above ?
> 
> I have.

This attitude is not helpful. Please answer my questions, if necessary 
please reiterate, otherwise this discussion cannot be resolved and will 
only lead to frustration.


More information about the U-Boot mailing list