On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 12:12:26PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 03:12:40PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 01:55:04PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > > > I don't think it should be done this way. Is the goal compile testing > > > IORT code ? > > > > Yes > > > > > If so, why are we forcing it through the SMMU (only because > > > it can be compile tested while eg SMMUv3 driver can't ?) menu entry ? > > > > Because something needs to select it, and SMMU is one of the places > > that are implicitly using it. > > > > It isn't (and shouldn't be) a user selectable kconfig. Currently the > > only thing that selects it is the ARM64 master kconfig. > > I never said it should be a user selectable kconfig. I said that > I don't like using the SMMU entry (only) to select it just because > that entry allows COMPILE_TEST. So you would like each of the drivers that use it to select it? > > SMMUv3 doesn't COMPILE_TEST so it picks up the dependency transitivity > > through ARM64. I'm not sure why IORT was put as a global ARM64 kconfig > > dependency and not put in the places that directly need it. > > Because IORT is used by few ARM64 system IPs (that are enabled by > default, eg GIC), it makes sense to have a generic ARM64 select (if ACPI). IMHO that is not a good way to use kconfig, it is obfuscating and doesn't support things like COMPILE_TEST. > > > Maybe we can move IORT code into drivers/acpi and add a silent config > > > option there with a dependency on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST. > > > > That seems pretty weird to me, this is the right way to approach it, > > IMHO. Making an entire directory condition is pretty incompatible with > > COMPILE_TEST as a philosophy. > > That's not what I was suggesting. I was suggesting to move iort.c (or > some portions of it) into drivers/acpi if we care enough to compile test > it on arches !ARM64. > > It is also weird to have a file in drivers/acpi/arm64 that you want > to compile test on other arches IMO (and I don't think it is very useful > to compile test it either). Why? Just because the directory is named "arm64" doesn't mean it should be excluded from COMPILE_TEST. arch/arm64 yes, but not random directories in the driver tree. Stuff under drivers/ should strive to get 100% COMPILE_TEST coverage as much as practical. This makes everyone else's life easier. Jason
