Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Jul 2022 18:39:43 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] arm64 defconfig: Get faddr2line working | From | John Garry <> |
| |
On 25/07/2022 15:22, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> INTERCONNECT has no dependencies, so "select" - like for MAILBOX - >> should be fine, I suppose > There are a couple of trade-offs between the two approaches. > The main advantage of 'select' is that you can enable drivers more > easily and all the required subsystems are there automatically. > The advantage of 'depends on' is that it becomes easier to disable > entire subsystems that one may not need. > > Which of those two is more important is of course a matter of perspective, > I like to be able to turn things off more easily because that makes it > possible to test the corner cases with randconfig more easily, and it > helps produce size-reduced kernels for embedded systems. > > Another aspect is that we overall have more 'depends on' than 'select', > and sticking with the more common way avoids circular dependencies, > both within an area of the kernel and overall. > > The rule that I tend to follow with 'select' is to only use it on symbols > that you don't even want to show to users. If a feature is part of > a library (think zlib), then each user just needs to select the symbol > but you never actually have to decide whether to show it or not.
ok, seems reasonable. Personally I dislike 'select' for all the common reasons.
> >>>> And would each config item deletion merit a separate patch? >>> You send a combined patch for the obvious ones (secccomp >>> and mailbox AFAICT) or send them separately. For the other ones I think >>> we should try fixing the Kconfig files first, otherwise we just end up >>> putting them back afterwards. >> ok, fine. I'll deal with the obvious changes first plus >> CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO and then the non-obvious, non-trivial ones. I'll base >> on your arm/defconfig branch (for defconfig changes). > The CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO one should be fixed by my series from > last week already, do you still see another issue with that?
Ah, I thought that you re-enabled CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO for only the arm32 configs but see that you also re-enabled for arm64 defconfig as well.
> I actually > have another patch to fix up all the non-Arm defconfigs for this one as > well, but haven't sent that one yet.
Thanks, John
| |