Re: [PATCH v1 00/21] refactor Kconfig to consolidate KEXEC and CRASH options

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 6/14/23 22:26, Michael Ellerman wrote:
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
Michael, ok thanks!
eric



[Index of Archives]     [Linux SoC]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux