From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D159C4332E for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 15:19:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64A9A60240 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 15:19:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245288AbhCCPOE (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:14:04 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:50118 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241095AbhCCK0t (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 05:26:49 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1614767122; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=vMUUJSbWiaKTXgtpt8GHYmtHVmZoDHu1V86PH+IT7A0=; b=gKSyR3LXr/zD8dLGnPTk0SHwospUbNN9Qrg0Jw1ipKh0jPCWgCkctpUr2iHPcmkq7i3RL0 mQ2ThlceCo0ZV0SkoZLuW7ADQ9mIhA9a7UucWhT4iM0HN3eT8QMPTTG4nC6ZjjEIr67DoB o5JhBubwDwjauanHXU4Zphx63Zv4U4k= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-390-719A2JaVNDKjt3KlIWojNA-1; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 04:24:44 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 719A2JaVNDKjt3KlIWojNA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E756835E21; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 09:24:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (ovpn-119-68.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.119.68]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84D1B60BFA; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 09:24:42 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20210303034418.106762-1-eric.snowberg@oracle.com> References: <20210303034418.106762-1-eric.snowberg@oracle.com> To: Eric Snowberg Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, rdunlap@infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] certs: Fix wrong kconfig option used for x509_revocation_list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2033456.1614763481.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 09:24:41 +0000 Message-ID: <2033457.1614763481@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Eric Snowberg wrote: > +ifeq ($(CONFIG_SYSTEM_REVOCATION_LIST),y) > +obj-$(CONFIG_SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_KEYRING) += revocation_certificates.o > +endif Should the ifeq be referring to CONFIG_SYSTEM_REVOCATION_KEYS rather than CONFIG_SYSTEM_REVOCATION_LIST? In fact, since S_R_K depends indirectly on S_B_K, you should be able to just do: +obj-$(CONFIG_SYSTEM_REVOCATION_KEYS) += revocation_certificates.o > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSTEM_REVOCATION_LIST Here also? > + hostprogs-always-$(CONFIG_SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_KEYRING) += extract-cert And here too? (As an aside, I wonder if SYSTEM_REVOCATION_CERTS would be a better name, but I'm okay with leaving it as-is for now). David