On 11/21/24 at 08:47pm, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > > > > That would work, but I don't completely like it. > > > > > > (a) I want s390x to select NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM instead. Staring at a > > > bunch of similar cases (git grep "config NEED" | grep Kconfig, git grep > > > "config ARCH_WANTS" | grep Kconfig), "select" is the common way to do it. > > > > > > So unless there is a pretty good reason, I'll keep > > > NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM as is. > > > > That's easy to satify, see below: > > Yes, this is mostly what I have right now, except > > > > > ============simple version===== > > fs/proc/Kconfig: > > config NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM > > def n > > using "bool" here like other code. (I assume you meant "def_bool n", "bool" > seems to achieve the same thing) Yes, you are right. I didn't check it carefully. > > > ...... > > =================== > > fs/proc/Kconfig: > > config PROVIDE_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM > > def_bool n > > > > config NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM > > def_bool n > > > > config PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM > > def_bool y > > depends on PROC_VMCORE > > depends on NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM > > depends on PROVIDE_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM > > > > drivers/virtio/Kconfig: > > config VIRTIO_MEM > > select PROVIDE_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM if PROC_VMCORE > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > arch/s390/Kconfig: > > config S390 > > select NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM if PROC_VMCORE > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ======================== > > > > One last thing I haven't got well, If PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM has had > > dependency on PROC_VMCORE, can we take off the ' if PROC_VMCORE' when > > select PROVIDE_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM and NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM? > > We could; it would mean that in a .config file you would end up with > "NEED_PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM=y" with "#PROC_VMCORE" and no notion of > "PROC_VMCORE_DEVICE_RAM". Fair enough. I didn't think of this. Then keeping it is obvisouly better. Thanks. > > I don't particularly like that -- needing something that apparently does not > exist. Not sure if there is a best practice here, staring at some examples I > don't seem to find a consistent rule. I can just drop it, not the end of the > world. > > > Did you get to look at the other code changes in this patch set? Your > feedback would be highly appreciated! Will try. While I may not have valuable input about virtio-mem code.
