Re: [PATCH] erofs: Fix EROFS_FS_ZIP_LZMA_DEFAULT_MAX_STREAMS default logic
Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.ozlabs.lists.linux-erofs,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMuHMdURAXQ9KWpgnSvmODxsCzkUHUvzZMRwUpCFy9u1vZ0u8g@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Gao, On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 at 14:56, Gao Xiang <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 12:00:23PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > When NR_CPUS is less than 16, or when SMP is disabled, the default value > > of 16 is invalid. > > > > While actual configuration picks up a sensible and valid default > > (NR_CPUS or 1), "make savedefconfig" will still write a line like > > > > CONFIG_EROFS_FS_ZIP_LZMA_DEFAULT_MAX_STREAMS=1 > > > > to the defconfig file, even if that matches the sensible default. > > > > Avoid needlessly enlarging the defconfig files, and reduce churn for > > updating them, by specifying valid defaults depending on SMP and > > NR_CPUS. > > > > While at it, make the prompt depend on SMP, as there is no point in > > asking the user about the maximum number of decompression streams if > > there is only one valid answer. > > > > Fixes: c9b47e6b23114e93 ("erofs: cap LZMA stream pool size") > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> > > --- > > fs/erofs/Kconfig | 8 +++++--- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/erofs/Kconfig b/fs/erofs/Kconfig > > index 2dfc313588d283a0..37495e95a78d9bf6 100644 > > --- a/fs/erofs/Kconfig > > +++ b/fs/erofs/Kconfig > > @@ -132,11 +132,13 @@ config EROFS_FS_ZIP_LZMA > > Say N if you want to disable LZMA compression support. > > > > config EROFS_FS_ZIP_LZMA_DEFAULT_MAX_STREAMS > > - int "EROFS LZMA default maximum decompression streams" > > + int "EROFS LZMA default maximum decompression streams" if SMP > > As I said, if NR_CPUS is meaningful for both SMP or !SMP, there should > not be SMP involved in this Kconfig. > > In other words, if SMP below is just a workaround since some arches > leave NR_CPUS = 0 if !SMP. If NR_CPUS is valid unconditionally, I don't > think SMP is at all useful here. Ideally, this should be "if NR_CPUS > 1". But we can't do that until all (i.e. most) architectures that do not define NR_CPUS if SMP=n are fixed. > Could you just drop if SMP and leave this configuration unconditionally > shown for users? It's easy for all users to get how this Kconfig works. I cannot. There are +20000 configuration symbols. No one wants to see questions that are irrelevant. I can change it to "if SMP && NR_CPUS > 1", though ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected] In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds