Re: [RFC v3 07/13] tables.h: add linker table support
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [RFC v3 07/13] tables.h: add linker table support
- From: Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 22:23:34 +0200
- Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx, masami.hiramatsu.pt@xxxxxxxxxxx, jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx, heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx, ananth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, anil.s.keshavamurthy@xxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, realmz6@xxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, gnomes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, arnd@xxxxxxxx, ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ananth@xxxxxxxxxx, pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx, fontana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ciaran.farrell@xxxxxxxx, christopher.denicolo@xxxxxxxx, david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx, konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx, mcb30@xxxxxxxx, jgross@xxxxxxxx, andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx, andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx, dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mmarek@xxxxxxxx, linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jkosina@xxxxxxx, korea.drzix@xxxxxxxxx, linux-kbuild@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx, will.deacon@xxxxxxx, rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx, jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <20160812170451.GE3296@wotan.suse.de>
- References: <20160729100630.GA27271@nazgul.tnic> <20160808150539.GG3296@wotan.suse.de> <20160809035508.GC11445@nazgul.tnic> <20160812035129.GA3296@wotan.suse.de> <20160812052303.GB12013@nazgul.tnic> <20160812065011.GB3296@wotan.suse.de> <20160812072507.GC12013@nazgul.tnic> <20160812152805.GD3296@wotan.suse.de> <20160812155121.GB13315@nazgul.tnic> <20160812170451.GE3296@wotan.suse.de>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.6.2 (2016-07-01)
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 07:04:52PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Alright, how's this new description:
>
> diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig
> index cac3f096050d..73e4890c24c4 100644
> --- a/init/Kconfig
> +++ b/init/Kconfig
> @@ -53,6 +53,34 @@ config CROSS_COMPILE
> need to set this unless you want the configured kernel build
> directory to select the cross-compiler automatically.
>
> +config BUILD_AVOID_BITROT
> + bool "Always force building specially annotated targets"
> + default n
> + help
> + If enabled then the the special table-* Makefile targets will always
> + be forced to be compiled even if their respective CONFIG_ option has
> + been disabled, but its objects will only be linked in if the same
> + respective CONFIG_ option has been enabled. This helps avoid code
> + bit rot issues, use for these targets should be carefully considred
> + by maintainers. You can safely enable this option at the expense of
> + increasing compile time. Enabling this option helps avoid code bit
> + rot by taking advantage of the facilities provided and enabled by
> + using linker tables documented under:
As a kernel developer I have _no_ idea what this is trying to say at
all, sorry.
What is a "specially annotated target"? Who is forcing it to be built?
What does it mean if it isn't built?
> +
> + include/linux/tables.h
> +
> + The special targets supported are:
> +
> + o table-obj-y
> + o table-lib-y
What does this mean to me as a developer? What does it mean to a user
who wants to figure out if it should be enabled or not?
> +
> + Say Y if you have a decent build machine and would like to help test
> + building code for more subsystems. Say N if you do you not have a
> + good build machine or only want to compile what you've enabled for
> + your kernel.
How does this test different subsystems? How does disabling it not test
them? Why would I care either way?
> +
> + Enabling this option never increases the size of your kernel.
Then what does it do? Just burn electricity for no reason?
totally confused...
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]