[PATCH net v2] net/iucv: descend into net/iucv independently of IUCV

[PATCH net v2] net/iucv: descend into net/iucv independently of IUCV

[Pengpeng Hou]

AFIUCV can be enabled as either built-in or a module through QETH_L3 even
when IUCV is disabled. The top-level net Makefile currently descends into
net/iucv/ only under CONFIG_IUCV, so the valid configurations
CONFIG_AFIUCV=y/m with CONFIG_IUCV=n never consider af_iucv.o.

Always descend into net/iucv/. Its Makefile already gates iucv.o and
af_iucv.o on their own Kconfig symbols, so this does not build either
object unless selected.

Fixes: c69748d1c9b5 ("iucv: kernel option for z/VM IUCV and HiperSockets")
Reviewed-by: Alexandra Winter <wintera@linux.ibm.com>

Assisted-by: Codex:gpt-5
Signed-off-by: Pengpeng Hou <pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn>
---
Changes since RFC:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260625061303.36326-1-pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn/
- submit this as a regular fix rather than an RFC
- describe both AFIUCV=y and AFIUCV=m with IUCV=n
- add Alexandra's Reviewed-by

 net/Makefile | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/Makefile b/net/Makefile
index 5b2dd7f07a85..c0da946b281e 100644
--- a/net/Makefile
+++ b/net/Makefile
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_WIRELESS)		+= wireless/
 obj-$(CONFIG_MAC80211)		+= mac80211/
 obj-$(CONFIG_TIPC)		+= tipc/
 obj-$(CONFIG_NETLABEL)		+= netlabel/
-obj-$(CONFIG_IUCV)		+= iucv/
+obj-y				+= iucv/
 obj-$(CONFIG_SMC)		+= smc/
 obj-$(CONFIG_RFKILL)		+= rfkill/
 obj-$(CONFIG_NET_9P)		+= 9p/
-- 
2.50.1 (Apple Git-155)

Re: [PATCH net v2] net/iucv: descend into net/iucv independently of IUCV

[Alexandra Winter]

On 17.08.26 14:06, Alexandra Winter wrote:
> 
> 
> On 16.08.26 15:55, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
>> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
>>
>> New issues:
>> - [High] Unconditional descent into net/iucv/ causes a vmlinux linker error when CONFIG_AFIUCV=y and CONFIG_IUCV=m.
> 
> @Pengpeng Hou,
> if it easier, you can also fix this issue by making CONFIG_AFIUCV depend on CONFIG_IUCV.
> I see no practical scenario where we would want AFIUCV without IUCV.
> 


And I agree with Sashiko. I did not verify this combination with your initial RFC, sorry.
So I propose to depend AFIUCV on IUCV instead of your patch.
Do you want to send such a patch, or do you want me to do that?