On 6/14/19 8:01 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:41 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 6/11/19 5:08 PM, Matteo Croce wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:07 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> * Configure standard kernel features (expert users) >>> * >>> Configure standard kernel features (expert users) (EXPERT) [Y/?] y >>> Multiple users, groups and capabilities support (MULTIUSER) [Y/n/?] y >>> sgetmask/ssetmask syscalls support (SGETMASK_SYSCALL) [N/y/?] n >>> Sysfs syscall support (SYSFS_SYSCALL) [N/y/?] n >>> Sysctl syscall support (SYSCTL_SYSCALL) [N/y/?] (NEW) >> >> So I still say that MPLS_ROUTING should depend on PROC_SYSCTL, >> not select it. > > It clearly shouldn't select PROC_SYSCTL, but I think it should not > have a 'depends on' statement either. I think the correct fix for the > original problem would have been something like > > --- a/net/mpls/af_mpls.c > +++ b/net/mpls/af_mpls.c > @@ -2659,6 +2659,9 @@ static int mpls_net_init(struct net *net) > net->mpls.ip_ttl_propagate = 1; > net->mpls.default_ttl = 255; > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL)) > + return 0; > + > table = kmemdup(mpls_table, sizeof(mpls_table), GFP_KERNEL); > if (table == NULL) > return -ENOMEM; > Without sysctl, the entire mpls_router code is disabled. So if sysctl is not enabled there is no point in building this file.
