Hi Herbert, On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 5:07 AM Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 04:45:10AM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > > Ugh, can we please not? That will really make things much harder and > > more annoying for me. I have an early pull planned, and you'll quickly > > be able to rebase on top of it. It also doesn't appear to conflict > > with anything you have queued up. Please, I would really appreciate > > some straight forward linearity here, and I don't think my taking it > > will negatively impact the flow. > > Your patches as they stand will break the crypto tree. So > that's why they should not go in without the proper changes. Okay, I'll try to fix them up so that they don't break the crypto tree, and given below, I think I should be able to do this with fewer changes to some of the Kconfig, which will hopefully address your concerns and enable me to take this patch so that things are a bit more straightforward. > > > That snippet is inside an 'if CRYPTO' block, so it can't be selected > > without CRYPTO being enabled. > > No CONFIG_CRYPTO is not the issue. This depends on specific > bits of the Crypto API such as CRYPTO_HASH. Simply selecting > it is also not acceptable because you will be forcing all of the > Crypto API into vmlinux even though none of it is required by > /dev/random. Thanks, I think I see what your concern is now. I'll take a stab at addressing that. Jason
