On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 4:47 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 8/3/23 19:42, Adam Ford wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 9:37 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 8/3/23 19:26, Adam Ford wrote: > >>> Where/how was the .config generated? > >>> > >> > >> Aleksandr posted a link to the config file above. > > > > I get that, but I am not sure how this was generated. > > > > Nor am I. Alexsandr can hopefully tell us. We take a defconfig and apply a number of modifications on top of it (*). Some configs are enabled (e.g. various sanitizers), some are disabled (e.g. a number of heavy subsystems are disabled for instances that run on qemu w/o hardware acceleration). We rely heavily on olddefconfig to detect inconsistencies during config generation (we regenerate them manually once in a while and the tool makes sure our changes do not contradict KConfigs) and to automatically correct inconsistencies when a kernel is being (re-)built (there's no other way -- something constantly changes in the mainline tree and it's impossible to keep track of it all manually). In this particular case, we indeed disabled CONFIG_GENERIC_PHY, but left other dependent configs enabled and `make olddefconfig` could unfortunately neither help us detect the problem nor resolve it during the build :( (*) FWIW here's a doc for reference: https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/dashboard/config/linux/README.md > > >> > >>> Are you building linux-next or something else? The .config file > >>> generated when I build the arm64 defconfig show both enabled: > >> > >> linux-next. > >> > >> > >>> $ grep GENERIC_PHY .config > >>> CONFIG_GENERIC_PHY=y > >>> CONFIG_GENERIC_PHY_MIPI_DPHY=y > >>> > >> > >> Yes, this is not a defconfig file. > > > > I know, but it is a .config file that is generated from make defconfig > > ARCH=arm64 > >> > > Not necessarily. It could be generated by 'make randconfig'. > > >>> > >>>> but yes, selecting GENERIC_PHY (needed in 3 places) does fix the warnings > >>>> and build error. 2 instance in drm/bridge/Kconfig and one in > >>>> drm/bridge/cadence/Kconfig (found by inspection). > >>>> > >>>> I had no problem replicating the kconfig warnings and build error. > >>> > >>> If you can replicate the problem, I'd suggest submitting a patch. > >> > >> Sure, I'll do that. > > > > Great! thanks. I see the patch has already been sent. Thank you very much! > > > > adam > >> > >> -- > >> ~Randy > > -- > ~Randy
