[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4d86b207-77af-dc5d-88a4-f092be0043f6@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 15:21:29 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Babu Moger <babu.moger@....com>, corbet@....net,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com
Cc: x86@...nel.org, vkuznets@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com,
jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, mchehab+samsung@...nel.org,
changbin.du@...el.com, namit@...are.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com, asteinhauser@...gle.com,
anshuman.khandual@....com, jan.kiszka@...mens.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, steven.price@....com,
rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, peterx@...hat.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, arjunroy@...gle.com, logang@...tatee.com,
thellstrom@...are.com, aarcange@...hat.com, justin.he@....com,
robin.murphy@....com, ira.weiny@...el.com, keescook@...omium.org,
jgross@...e.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
vineela.tummalapalli@...el.com, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
sam@...nborg.org, acme@...hat.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arch/x86: Rename config
X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS to generic x86
> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> index 1197b5596d5a..8630b9fa06f5 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -1886,11 +1886,11 @@ config X86_UMIP
> specific cases in protected and virtual-8086 modes. Emulated
> results are dummy.
>
> -config X86_INTEL_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
> - prompt "Intel Memory Protection Keys"
> +config X86_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS
> + prompt "Memory Protection Keys"
> def_bool y
> # Note: only available in 64-bit mode
> - depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL && X86_64
> + depends on X86_64 && (CPU_SUP_INTEL || CPU_SUP_AMD)
> select ARCH_USES_HIGH_VMA_FLAGS
> select ARCH_HAS_PKEYS
> ---help---
It's a bit of a bummer that we're going to prompt everybody doing
oldconfig's for this new option. But, I don't know any way for Kconfig
to suppress it if the name is changed. Also, I guess the def_bool=y
means that menuconfig and olddefconfig will tend to do the right thing.
Do we *really* need to change the Kconfig name? The text prompt, sure.
End users see that and having Intel in there is massively confusing.
If I have to put up with seeing 'amd64' all over my Debian package
names, you can put up with a Kconfig name. :P
I'm really just wondering what the point of the churn is.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists