linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kconfig: Proposed language extension for multiple builds

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK7LNARpzPqt76vGeu6c14cHaf2=UU0o8H4HrM-NKQYc-19qjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 26 Feb 2023 23:32:03 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
To:     Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>
Cc:     U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot@...ts.denx.de>,
        lk <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tom Rini <trini@...sulko.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kconfig: Proposed language extension for multiple builds

On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 11:04 PM Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Masahiro,
>
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 at 20:31, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 11:38 AM Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > +Masahiro Yamada
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I do not know.
> > This seems a shorthand in Kconfig level.
> >
> >
> > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/u-boot(master)$ rgrep '^config SPL_' | wc
> >     540    1080   24872
> > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/u-boot(master)$ rgrep '^config TPL_' | wc
> >     163     326    7462
> >
> > If hundreds of duplications are not manageable,
> > go for it, but kconfig will be out-of-sync from the
> > upstream Kconfig.
>
> Yes that's right, it is a shorthand in Kconfig.
>
> The counts above understand the problem a little since quite a few
> CONFIG options without an SPL prefix are used in SPL. We don't have
> tools to estimate how many, and we sometimes add a new symbol to 'gain
> control' of a particular feature in a phase.
>
> My intent in sending this patch was to check whether this support for
> configuring multiple related builds (or something like it) could go
> upstream, which for Kconfig is Linux, I believe. What do you think?


This complexity is absolutely unneeded for Linux.

So, the answer is no.



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada