Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 6/13/23 15:21, Kees Cook wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 01:27:52PM -0400, Eric DeVolder wrote: >>> The Kconfig is refactored to consolidate KEXEC and CRASH options from >>> various arch/<arch>/Kconfig files into new file kernel/Kconfig.kexec. >> >> This looks very nice! >> > Thank you Kees! > >>> [...] >>> - The boolean ARCH_HAS_<option> in effect allows the arch to determine >>> when the feature is allowed. Archs which don't have the feature >>> simply do not provide the corresponding ARCH_HAS_<option>. >>> For each arch, where there previously were KEXEC and/or CRASH >>> options, these have been replaced with the corresponding boolean >>> ARCH_HAS_<option>, and an appropriate def_bool statement. >>> >>> For example, if the arch supports KEXEC_FILE, then the >>> ARCH_HAS_KEXEC_FILE simply has a 'def_bool y'. This permits the >>> KEXEC_FILE option to be available. >>> >>> If the arch has a 'depends on' statement in its original coding >>> of the option, then that expression becomes part of the def_bool >>> expression. For example, arm64 had: >>> >>> config KEXEC >>> depends on PM_SLEEP_SMP >>> >>> and in this solution, this converts to: >>> >>> config ARCH_HAS_KEXEC >>> def_bool PM_SLEEP_SMP >>> >>> >>> - In order to account for the differences in the config coding for >>> the three common options, the ARCH_SUPPORTS_<option> is used. >>> This options has a 'depends on <option>' statement to couple it >>> to the main option, and from there can insert the differences >>> from the common option and the arch original coding of that option. >>> >>> For example, a few archs enable CRYPTO and CRYTPO_SHA256 for >>> KEXEC_FILE. These require a ARCH_SUPPORTS_KEXEC_FILE and >>> 'select CRYPTO' and 'select CRYPTO_SHA256' statements. >> >> Naming nit: "HAS" and "SUPPORTS" feel very similar, and looking at >> existing configs, "ARCH_SUPPORTS_..." is already used for doing this >> kind of bare "bool" management. e.g. see ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 >> >> It looks like you need to split "depends" and "select" so the options >> can be chosen separately from the "selectable" configs. >> >> How about naming this ARCH_SELECTS_<option>, since that's what it's >> there for? >> > I'm OK with this. Let's see if others agree? Yeah please rename one or both of them. At a glance the difference between HAS and SUPPORTS is very non-obvious. I like Kees' suggestion to use ARCH_SUPPORTS and ARCH_SELECTS. cheers
