Re: [PATCH v1 00/21] refactor Kconfig to consolidate KEXEC and CRASH options
Eric DeVolder <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ports.m68k,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel,gmane.linux.ports.ia64,gmane.linux.ports.mips,gmane.linux.ports.parisc,gmane.linux.ports.ppc64.devel,gmane.linux.ports.riscv,gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
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? Thank you! eric > -Kees >