From: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@kernel.org>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@samsung.com>,
Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
David Gow <davidgow@google.com>, Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>,
linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] module: make structure definitions always visible
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 15:24:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7ccb0a97-fc20-4493-8187-48ecfd07bac2@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250711081047-ea2c1e83-1b87-4331-acad-cbbfe6be67d8@linutronix.de>
On 11/07/2025 08.29, Thomas WeiÃschuh wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 09:11:05PM +0200, Daniel Gomez wrote:
>> On 12/06/2025 16.53, Thomas WeiÃschuh wrote:
>>> To write code that works with both CONFIG_MODULES=y and CONFIG_MODULES=n
>>> it is convenient to use "if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULES))" over raw #ifdef.
>>> The code will still fully typechecked but the unreachable parts are
>>> discarded by the compiler. This prevents accidental breakage when a certain
>>> kconfig combination was not specifically tested by the developer.
>>> This pattern is already supported to some extend by module.h defining
>>> empty stub functions if CONFIG_MODULES=n.
>>> However some users of module.h work on the structured defined by module.h.
>>>
>>> Therefore these structure definitions need to be visible, too.
>>
>> We are missing here which structures are needed. + we are making more things
>> visible than what we actually need.
>>
>>>
>>> Many structure members are still gated by specific configuration settings.
>>> The assumption for those is that the code using them will be gated behind
>>> the same configuration setting anyways.
>>
>> I think code and kconfig need to reflect the actual dependencies. For example,
>> if CONFIG_LIVEPATCH depends on CONFIG_MODULES, we need to specify that in
>> Kconfig with depends on, as well as keep the code gated by these 2 configs with
>> ifdef/IS_ENABLED.
>
> If CONFIG_LIVEPATCH depends on CONFIG_MODULES in kconfig then
> IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LIVEPATCH) will depend on CONFIG_MODULES automatically.
> There is no need for another explicit IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULES).
This makes sense to me. My assessment before to reflect in code what we have in
kconfig does not scale. Thanks.
>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/module.h | 23 ++++++++++++-----------
>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
{...}
>>
>> After the patch, mod_tree_node is not needed externally.
>
> Can you explain what you mean with "not needed externally"?
> 'struct mod_tree_node' is only ever used by core module code.
> It is only public because it is embedded in the public 'struct module'
But only when MODULES_TREE_LOOKUP is enabled. Now, all kernels (regardless of
that config) will define mod_tree_node data structure.
However, Petr already stated that is harmless to do so. I was trying here to
not be useless.
With that, changes look good to me:
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@samsung.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-11 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-12 14:53 [PATCH 0/3] " Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-12 14:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] module: move 'struct module_use' to internal.h Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-17 7:38 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-19 16:27 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-06-12 14:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] module: make structure definitions always visible Thomas Weißschuh
2025-07-07 19:11 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-07-08 9:32 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-07-11 6:29 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-07-11 13:24 ` Daniel Gomez [this message]
2025-07-08 9:39 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-12 14:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] kunit: test: Drop CONFIG_MODULE ifdeffery Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-17 7:44 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-17 8:39 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-17 15:07 ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-20 9:51 ` David Gow
2025-07-11 13:25 ` Daniel Gomez
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7ccb0a97-fc20-4493-8187-48ecfd07bac2@kernel.org \
--to=da.gomez@kernel.org \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=da.gomez@samsung.com \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-modules@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=petr.pavlu@suse.com \
--cc=rmoar@google.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®