On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 1:51 AM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Nov 2024, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Documentation/process/changes.rst > > documents basic tools necessary for building the kernel. > > > > Python3 is listed as "optional" because it is required > > only for some CONFIG options. > > > > If the exact dependency is unclear, it is better to install > > all tools listed in that table. > > I think we're slightly in a limbo with the python build dependency. I > think it got initially merged a bit under the radar. And I don't mean to > imply any ill will here, it just didn't get the attention it maybe > should have. The dependency table got updated afterwards. > > Now, what's the status for more modules depending on python? I for one > would like to use it for i915.ko, but I'm a bit uneasy about it as long > as it's "optional". Conversely, how many more users would we need to > switch the status from "optional" to "required"? > The way I've been looking at it is, for drm gpu drivers, the dependency is only a subset of the py that mesa depends on at build time, and if you are wanting to build the KMD you almost certainly want mesa as well. Maybe the situation is different for kms-only drivers or other subsystems. I may be biased here, but being able to generate code/tables/etc at build time is something that python is very useful for, and has been used to great effect in mesa. And because of mesa's dependency, it seems like a reasonable dependency on the kernel side as well. My only question is how to make the dependency visible in the least confusing way for both users and packagers. BR, -R > > BR, > Jani. > > > -- > Jani Nikula, Intel
