[PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Chuck Lever]

Recently a reverse dependency was added to fs/Kconfig to ensure that
PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.

There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt that
states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no prompts
anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."

A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry currently
uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus CONFIG_NFSD_V4
should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.

For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can "select"
SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.

XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5, which is
visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent was to
enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we should
make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.

Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
---

 fs/Kconfig |    8 +++-----
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig
index 4c16789..5f00ee7 100644
--- a/fs/Kconfig
+++ b/fs/Kconfig
@@ -1662,8 +1662,6 @@ config NFSD
 	select CRYPTO_MD5 if NFSD_V4
 	select CRYPTO if NFSD_V4
 	select FS_POSIX_ACL if NFSD_V4
-	select PROC_FS if NFSD_V4
-	select PROC_FS if SUNRPC_GSS
 	help
 	  Choose Y here if you want to allow other computers to access
 	  files residing on this system using Sun's Network File System
@@ -1723,7 +1721,7 @@ config NFSD_V3_ACL
 
 config NFSD_V4
 	bool "NFS server support for NFS version 4 (EXPERIMENTAL)"
-	depends on NFSD && EXPERIMENTAL
+	depends on NFSD && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
 	select NFSD_V3
 	select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
 	help
@@ -1796,7 +1794,7 @@ config SUNRPC_BIND34
 
 config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
 	tristate "Secure RPC: Kerberos V mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
-	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
+	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
 	select SUNRPC_GSS
 	select CRYPTO
 	select CRYPTO_MD5
@@ -1815,7 +1813,7 @@ config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
 
 config RPCSEC_GSS_SPKM3
 	tristate "Secure RPC: SPKM3 mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
-	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
+	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
 	select SUNRPC_GSS
 	select CRYPTO
 	select CRYPTO_MD5

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 12:52:15PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Recently a reverse dependency was added to fs/Kconfig to ensure that
> PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
> 
> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt that
> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no prompts
> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
> 
> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry currently
> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus CONFIG_NFSD_V4
> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
> 
> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can "select"
> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
> 
> XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5, which is
> visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent was to
> enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we should
> make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
> SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.

This is better than what we had - so OK.
We can revisit when kconfig gets more features added to support
such configurations.

	Sam

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 12:52:15PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Recently a reverse dependency was added to fs/Kconfig to ensure that
> PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
> 
> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt that
> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no prompts
> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
> 
> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry currently
> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus CONFIG_NFSD_V4
> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
> 
> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can "select"
> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
> 
> XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5, which is
> visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent was to
> enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we should
> make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
> SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.

This is better than what we had - so OK.
We can revisit when kconfig gets more features added to support
such configurations.

	Sam

[PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Chuck Lever]

Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.

There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt that
states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no prompts
anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."

A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry currently
uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus CONFIG_NFSD_V4
should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.

For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can "select"
SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.

XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5, which is
visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent was to
enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we should
make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.

Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
---

 fs/Kconfig |    8 +++-----
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig
index 0c8f85d..9ee288f 100644
--- a/fs/Kconfig
+++ b/fs/Kconfig
@@ -1662,8 +1662,6 @@ config NFSD
 	select CRYPTO_MD5 if NFSD_V4
 	select CRYPTO if NFSD_V4
 	select FS_POSIX_ACL if NFSD_V4
-	select PROC_FS if NFSD_V4
-	select PROC_FS if SUNRPC_GSS
 	help
 	  Choose Y here if you want to allow other computers to access
 	  files residing on this system using Sun's Network File System
@@ -1723,7 +1721,7 @@ config NFSD_V3_ACL
 
 config NFSD_V4
 	bool "NFS server support for NFS version 4 (EXPERIMENTAL)"
-	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && EXPERIMENTAL
+	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
 	select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
 	help
 	  This option enables support in your system's NFS server for
@@ -1798,7 +1796,7 @@ config SUNRPC_BIND34
 
 config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
 	tristate "Secure RPC: Kerberos V mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
-	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
+	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
 	select SUNRPC_GSS
 	select CRYPTO
 	select CRYPTO_MD5
@@ -1817,7 +1815,7 @@ config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
 
 config RPCSEC_GSS_SPKM3
 	tristate "Secure RPC: SPKM3 mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
-	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
+	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
 	select SUNRPC_GSS
 	select CRYPTO
 	select CRYPTO_MD5

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
> ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
> 
> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt that
> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no prompts
> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
> 
> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry currently
> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus CONFIG_NFSD_V4
> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.

OK.

> 
> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can "select"
> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.

This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't before.

I assume nobody cares?

--b.

> 
> XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5, which is
> visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent was to
> enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we should
> make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
> SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> ---
> 
>  fs/Kconfig |    8 +++-----
>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig
> index 0c8f85d..9ee288f 100644
> --- a/fs/Kconfig
> +++ b/fs/Kconfig
> @@ -1662,8 +1662,6 @@ config NFSD
>  	select CRYPTO_MD5 if NFSD_V4
>  	select CRYPTO if NFSD_V4
>  	select FS_POSIX_ACL if NFSD_V4
> -	select PROC_FS if NFSD_V4
> -	select PROC_FS if SUNRPC_GSS
>  	help
>  	  Choose Y here if you want to allow other computers to access
>  	  files residing on this system using Sun's Network File System
> @@ -1723,7 +1721,7 @@ config NFSD_V3_ACL
>  
>  config NFSD_V4
>  	bool "NFS server support for NFS version 4 (EXPERIMENTAL)"
> -	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && EXPERIMENTAL
> +	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>  	select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>  	help
>  	  This option enables support in your system's NFS server for
> @@ -1798,7 +1796,7 @@ config SUNRPC_BIND34
>  
>  config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>  	tristate "Secure RPC: Kerberos V mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>  	select CRYPTO
>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
> @@ -1817,7 +1815,7 @@ config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>  
>  config RPCSEC_GSS_SPKM3
>  	tristate "Secure RPC: SPKM3 mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>  	select CRYPTO
>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
> 

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Trond Myklebust]

On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 16:23 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> > Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
> > ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
> > 
> > There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt that
> > states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no prompts
> > anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
> > 
> > A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry currently
> > uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus CONFIG_NFSD_V4
> > should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
> 
> OK.
> 
> > 
> > For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can "select"
> > SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
> > entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
> > So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
> 
> This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't before.
> 
> I assume nobody cares?

You assume wrongly. Patch NAKed...

Trond

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Chuck Lever]

On Feb 12, 2008, at 4:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
>> ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
>>
>> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt  
>> that
>> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no  
>> prompts
>> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
>>
>> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry  
>> currently
>> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus  
>> CONFIG_NFSD_V4
>> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
>
> OK.
>
>>
>> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can  
>> "select"
>> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
>> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
>> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
>
> This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't  
> before.
>
> I assume nobody cares?

Huh?  If I disable PROC_FS, I can still select the NFS client  
options, even NFSv4.

>> XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5,  
>> which is
>> visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent  
>> was to
>> enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we  
>> should
>> make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
>> SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  fs/Kconfig |    8 +++-----
>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig
>> index 0c8f85d..9ee288f 100644
>> --- a/fs/Kconfig
>> +++ b/fs/Kconfig
>> @@ -1662,8 +1662,6 @@ config NFSD
>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5 if NFSD_V4
>>  	select CRYPTO if NFSD_V4
>>  	select FS_POSIX_ACL if NFSD_V4
>> -	select PROC_FS if NFSD_V4
>> -	select PROC_FS if SUNRPC_GSS
>>  	help
>>  	  Choose Y here if you want to allow other computers to access
>>  	  files residing on this system using Sun's Network File System
>> @@ -1723,7 +1721,7 @@ config NFSD_V3_ACL
>>
>>  config NFSD_V4
>>  	bool "NFS server support for NFS version 4 (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>> -	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && EXPERIMENTAL
>> +	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>  	select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>  	help
>>  	  This option enables support in your system's NFS server for
>> @@ -1798,7 +1796,7 @@ config SUNRPC_BIND34
>>
>>  config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>  	tristate "Secure RPC: Kerberos V mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
>> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>>  	select CRYPTO
>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
>> @@ -1817,7 +1815,7 @@ config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>
>>  config RPCSEC_GSS_SPKM3
>>  	tristate "Secure RPC: SPKM3 mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
>> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>>  	select CRYPTO
>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
>>

--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 05:10:57PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>
> On Feb 12, 2008, at 4:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>> Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
>>> ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
>>>
>>> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt  
>>> that
>>> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no  
>>> prompts
>>> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
>>>
>>> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry  
>>> currently
>>> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus  
>>> CONFIG_NFSD_V4
>>> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
>>
>> OK.
>>
>>>
>>> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can  
>>> "select"
>>> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
>>> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
>>> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
>>
>> This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't  
>> before.
>>
>> I assume nobody cares?
>
> Huh?  If I disable PROC_FS, I can still select the NFS client options, 
> even NFSv4.

OK.  I'm confused, then:

	NFS_V4 selects RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
	RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 (after this patch) depends on PROC_FS

What am I missing?

--b.

>
>>> XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5,  
>>> which is
>>> visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent  
>>> was to
>>> enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we  
>>> should
>>> make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
>>> SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>  fs/Kconfig |    8 +++-----
>>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig
>>> index 0c8f85d..9ee288f 100644
>>> --- a/fs/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/fs/Kconfig
>>> @@ -1662,8 +1662,6 @@ config NFSD
>>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5 if NFSD_V4
>>>  	select CRYPTO if NFSD_V4
>>>  	select FS_POSIX_ACL if NFSD_V4
>>> -	select PROC_FS if NFSD_V4
>>> -	select PROC_FS if SUNRPC_GSS
>>>  	help
>>>  	  Choose Y here if you want to allow other computers to access
>>>  	  files residing on this system using Sun's Network File System
>>> @@ -1723,7 +1721,7 @@ config NFSD_V3_ACL
>>>
>>>  config NFSD_V4
>>>  	bool "NFS server support for NFS version 4 (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>>> -	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && EXPERIMENTAL
>>> +	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>  	select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>>  	help
>>>  	  This option enables support in your system's NFS server for
>>> @@ -1798,7 +1796,7 @@ config SUNRPC_BIND34
>>>
>>>  config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>>  	tristate "Secure RPC: Kerberos V mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>>> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
>>> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>>>  	select CRYPTO
>>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
>>> @@ -1817,7 +1815,7 @@ config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>>
>>>  config RPCSEC_GSS_SPKM3
>>>  	tristate "Secure RPC: SPKM3 mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>>> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
>>> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>>>  	select CRYPTO
>>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
>>>
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
> chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
>
>
>

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 04:47:16PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 16:23 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> > > Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
> > > ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
> > > 
> > > There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt that
> > > states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no prompts
> > > anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
> > > 
> > > A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry currently
> > > uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus CONFIG_NFSD_V4
> > > should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
> > 
> > OK.
> > 
> > > 
> > > For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can "select"
> > > SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
> > > entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
> > > So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
> > 
> > This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't before.
> > 
> > I assume nobody cares?
> 
> You assume wrongly. Patch NAKed...

Do you have a use case in mind?  (Just curious.)

--b.

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Trond Myklebust]

On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 17:32 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > I assume nobody cares?
> > 
> > You assume wrongly. Patch NAKed...
> 
> Do you have a use case in mind?  (Just curious.)

Embedded systems often compile without sysctl and/or procfs support. Why
shouldn't they be able to run an NFS client with RPCSEC_GSS?

The other argument is that there is _nothing_ in the actual auth_gss
code that depends on procfs. The "dependency" (if there is one) is
between net/sunrpc/cache.c and procfs, and in fact, both sunrpc and the
auth_gss modules will compile just fine without procfs.

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Chuck Lever]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 836 bytes --]

Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 17:32 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>>> I assume nobody cares?
>>> You assume wrongly. Patch NAKed...
>> Do you have a use case in mind?  (Just curious.)
> 
> Embedded systems often compile without sysctl and/or procfs support. Why
> shouldn't they be able to run an NFS client with RPCSEC_GSS?
> 
> The other argument is that there is _nothing_ in the actual auth_gss
> code that depends on procfs. The "dependency" (if there is one) is
> between net/sunrpc/cache.c and procfs, and in fact, both sunrpc and the
> auth_gss modules will compile just fine without procfs.

In that case, do we really even need a PROC_FS dependency (forward or 
reverse) for the RPCSEC entries?

It would be simple to split this patch into an NFSD_V4 part and an 
RPCSEC part, and just drop the RPCSEC part.

[-- Attachment #2: chuck_lever.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 315 bytes --]

begin:vcard
fn:Chuck Lever
n:Lever;Chuck
org:Oracle Corporation;Corporate Architecture: Linux Projects Group
adr:;;1015 Granger Avenue;Ann Arbor;MI;48104;USA
email;internet:chuck dot lever at nospam oracle dot com
title:Principal Member of Staff
tel;work:+1 248 614 5091
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Chuck Lever]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3646 bytes --]

J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 05:10:57PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> On Feb 12, 2008, at 4:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>>> Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
>>>> ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
>>>>
>>>> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt  
>>>> that
>>>> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no  
>>>> prompts
>>>> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
>>>>
>>>> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry  
>>>> currently
>>>> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus  
>>>> CONFIG_NFSD_V4
>>>> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
>>> OK.
>>>
>>>> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can  
>>>> "select"
>>>> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
>>>> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
>>>> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
>>> This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't  
>>> before.
>>>
>>> I assume nobody cares?
>> Huh?  If I disable PROC_FS, I can still select the NFS client options, 
>> even NFSv4.
> 
> OK.  I'm confused, then:
> 
> 	NFS_V4 selects RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
> 	RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 (after this patch) depends on PROC_FS
> 
> What am I missing?

It appears that the "select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5" is a no-op if 
RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 hasn't met it's forward dependencies.

>>>> XXX: Both CONFIG_NFSV4 and CONFIG_NFSD_V4 select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5,  
>>>> which is
>>>> visible, which kconfig-language.txt also frowns upon.  The intent  
>>>> was to
>>>> enable at least one GSS mechanism if V4 was enabled.  Perhaps we  
>>>> should
>>>> make SUNRPC_GSS visible, and make the NFSv4 options visible only if
>>>> SUNRPC_GSS is enabled.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>>  fs/Kconfig |    8 +++-----
>>>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/Kconfig b/fs/Kconfig
>>>> index 0c8f85d..9ee288f 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/fs/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -1662,8 +1662,6 @@ config NFSD
>>>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5 if NFSD_V4
>>>>  	select CRYPTO if NFSD_V4
>>>>  	select FS_POSIX_ACL if NFSD_V4
>>>> -	select PROC_FS if NFSD_V4
>>>> -	select PROC_FS if SUNRPC_GSS
>>>>  	help
>>>>  	  Choose Y here if you want to allow other computers to access
>>>>  	  files residing on this system using Sun's Network File System
>>>> @@ -1723,7 +1721,7 @@ config NFSD_V3_ACL
>>>>
>>>>  config NFSD_V4
>>>>  	bool "NFS server support for NFS version 4 (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>>>> -	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>> +	depends on NFSD && NFSD_V3 && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>>  	select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>>>  	help
>>>>  	  This option enables support in your system's NFS server for
>>>> @@ -1798,7 +1796,7 @@ config SUNRPC_BIND34
>>>>
>>>>  config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>>>  	tristate "Secure RPC: Kerberos V mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>>>> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>>>>  	select CRYPTO
>>>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
>>>> @@ -1817,7 +1815,7 @@ config RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>>>>
>>>>  config RPCSEC_GSS_SPKM3
>>>>  	tristate "Secure RPC: SPKM3 mechanism (EXPERIMENTAL)"
>>>> -	depends on SUNRPC && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>> +	depends on SUNRPC && PROC_FS && EXPERIMENTAL
>>>>  	select SUNRPC_GSS
>>>>  	select CRYPTO
>>>>  	select CRYPTO_MD5
>>>>
>> --
>> Chuck Lever
>> chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
>>
>>
>>


[-- Attachment #2: chuck_lever.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 315 bytes --]

begin:vcard
fn:Chuck Lever
n:Lever;Chuck
org:Oracle Corporation;Corporate Architecture: Linux Projects Group
adr:;;1015 Granger Avenue;Ann Arbor;MI;48104;USA
email;internet:chuck dot lever at nospam oracle dot com
title:Principal Member of Staff
tel;work:+1 248 614 5091
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Chuck Lever]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 769 bytes --]

Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 17:32 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>>> I assume nobody cares?
>>> You assume wrongly. Patch NAKed...
>> Do you have a use case in mind?  (Just curious.)
> 
> Embedded systems often compile without sysctl and/or procfs support. Why
> shouldn't they be able to run an NFS client with RPCSEC_GSS?

OK, it looks like the patch that adds the "depends on SYSCTL" to the 
LOCKD entry will cause NFS-enabled builds to break if CONFIG_SYSCTL is 
disabled, thanks to the recent addition of nlmclnt_init and nlmclnt_done.

Probably the better solution in this case is to ifdef out the 
register_sysctl() call in lockd if CONFIG_SYSCTL isn't set.  In the long 
run, should we make it possible to build the NFS client without lockd?

[-- Attachment #2: chuck_lever.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 315 bytes --]

begin:vcard
fn:Chuck Lever
n:Lever;Chuck
org:Oracle Corporation;Corporate Architecture: Linux Projects Group
adr:;;1015 Granger Avenue;Ann Arbor;MI;48104;USA
email;internet:chuck dot lever at nospam oracle dot com
title:Principal Member of Staff
tel;work:+1 248 614 5091
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 01:28:29PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 05:10:57PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>> On Feb 12, 2008, at 4:23 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:12:16PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>>>> Recently, commit 440bcc59 added a reverse dependency to fs/Kconfig to
>>>>> ensure that PROC_FS was enabled if NFSD_V4 was enabled.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a guideline in Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt 
>>>>>  that
>>>>> states "In general use select only for non-visible symbols (no   
>>>>> prompts
>>>>> anywhere) and for symbols with no dependencies."
>>>>>
>>>>> A quick grep around other Kconfig files reveals that no entry   
>>>>> currently
>>>>> uses "select PROC_FS" -- every one uses "depends on".  Thus   
>>>>> CONFIG_NFSD_V4
>>>>> should use "depends on PROC_FS" as well.
>>>> OK.
>>>>
>>>>> For SUNRPC_GSS, it's a little more complex.  Other entries can   
>>>>> "select"
>>>>> SUNRPC_GSS, as it is non-visible.  However, the guideline suggests an
>>>>> entry can't "select" it if it has a dependency (such as PROC_FS).
>>>>> So, we add forward dependencies on PROC_FS to RPCSEC_GSS_FOO instead.
>>>> This also makes the client dependent on PROC_FS, which it wasn't   
>>>> before.
>>>>
>>>> I assume nobody cares?
>>> Huh?  If I disable PROC_FS, I can still select the NFS client 
>>> options, even NFSv4.
>>
>> OK.  I'm confused, then:
>>
>> 	NFS_V4 selects RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5
>> 	RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 (after this patch) depends on PROC_FS
>>
>> What am I missing?
>
> It appears that the "select RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5" is a no-op if  
> RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 hasn't met it's forward dependencies.

Oh, OK, I didn't understand that.

However, this means that it's no longer possible to build a V4 client
with krb5 support without also including PROC_FS.  So I think we can't
apply this as is.

--b.

Re: [PATCH 07/11] NFSD: Use "depends on" for PROC_FS dependency

[Trond Myklebust]

On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 13:44 -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 17:32 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >>>> I assume nobody cares?
> >>> You assume wrongly. Patch NAKed...
> >> Do you have a use case in mind?  (Just curious.)
> > 
> > Embedded systems often compile without sysctl and/or procfs support. Why
> > shouldn't they be able to run an NFS client with RPCSEC_GSS?
> 
> OK, it looks like the patch that adds the "depends on SYSCTL" to the 
> LOCKD entry will cause NFS-enabled builds to break if CONFIG_SYSCTL is 
> disabled, thanks to the recent addition of nlmclnt_init and nlmclnt_done.
> 
> Probably the better solution in this case is to ifdef out the 
> register_sysctl() call in lockd if CONFIG_SYSCTL isn't set.  In the long 
> run, should we make it possible to build the NFS client without lockd?

In the long run, we really ought to try to make it possible to build a
NFSv3-only, or a NFSv4-only client, so yes...