2018-03-19 7:17 GMT+09:00 Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi Masahiro,
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 06:56:07PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> Commit 246cf9c26bf1 ("kbuild: Warn on selecting symbols with unmet
>> direct dependencies") forcibly promoted ->dir_dep.tri to yes from mod.
>> So, the unmet direct dependencies of tristate symbols are not reported.
>>
>> [Test Case]
>>
>> config MODULES
>> def_bool y
>> option modules
>>
>> config A
>> def_bool y
>> select B
>>
>> config B
>> tristate "B"
>> depends on m
>>
>> This causes unmet dependency because 'B' is forced 'y' ignoring
>> 'depends on m'. This should be warned.
>>
>> On the other hand, the following case ('B' is bool) should not be
>> warned, so 'depends on m' for bool symbols should be naturally treated
>> as 'depends on y'.
>>
>> [Test Case2 (not unmet dependency)]
>>
>> config MODULES
>> def_bool y
>> option modules
>>
>> config A
>> def_bool y
>> select B
>>
>> config B
>> bool "B"
>> depends on m
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v4:
>> - newly added
>>
>>
>> scripts/kconfig/symbol.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c b/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c
>> index 0f7eba7..def860b 100644
>> --- a/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c
>> +++ b/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c
>> @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ static void sym_calc_visibility(struct symbol *sym)
>> tri = yes;
>> if (sym->dir_dep.expr)
>> tri = expr_calc_value(sym->dir_dep.expr);
>> - if (tri == mod)
>> + if (sym->type == S_BOOLEAN && tri == mod)
>
> This seems to be very close to one of the issues fixed in the old
> v2.6.5 commit 5a87d187fce1 ("[PATCH] config: choice fix") accessible at
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/history/history.git/commit/?h=5a87d187fce1
>
> IMHO you could probably use (not tested!):
> + if (tri == mod && sym_get_type(sym) == S_BOOLEAN)
>
> instead of
> + if (sym->type == S_BOOLEAN && tri == mod)
>
> to be consistent with the rest of sym_calc_visibility().
I tested it, and probably OK.
I will squash the diff.
Thanks.
> Also, since after this commit there will be a great amount of symmetry
> between how dirdep/revdep/weak-revdep are calculated inside
> sym_calc_visibility(), somebody could probably unify the implementations
> in future (not subject of this patch).
>
>> tri = yes;
>> if (sym->dir_dep.tri != tri) {
>> sym->dir_dep.tri = tri;
>> @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ void sym_calc_value(struct symbol *sym)
>> }
>> }
>> calc_newval:
>> - if (sym->dir_dep.tri == no && sym->rev_dep.tri != no) {
>> + if (sym->dir_dep.tri < sym->rev_dep.tri) {
>
> Looks good.
>
>> struct expr *e;
>> e = expr_simplify_unmet_dep(sym->rev_dep.expr,
>> sym->dir_dep.expr);
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
>
> Best regards,
> Eugeniu.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
