On Friday, June 22, 2018, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > So, why do we feel that XIP_KERNEL needs a warm safety blanket around > > it? > > Because we simply try not to create invalid kernel configurations. > XIP_KERNEL is not more special than other symbols in that respect. Then here's a question. To be clear, the discussion is around "Being able to build a kernel that will not boot" So which one of these is more important: build or boot? Meaning what if you can select multiple platforms in kconfig, but then there is a .c file that does more sanity checking that then prevents the full build using a #error. In that case you can never "build" a kernel that has no chance of booting on all the selected platforms. There are configs options today that you can select, but unless some external criteria is met during build time, the build will fail (like with a "missing .h file" message or something) Chris -- 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
