linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 07/14] selftests/nolibc: defconfig: remove mrproper target

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: <20230725140431.36927-1-falcon@tinylab.org>
Date:   Tue, 25 Jul 2023 22:04:31 +0800
From:   Zhangjin Wu <falcon@...ylab.org>
To:     w@....eu
Cc:     arnd@...db.de, falcon@...ylab.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, thomas@...ch.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/14] selftests/nolibc: defconfig: remove mrproper target

> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 09:24:54PM +0800, Zhangjin Wu wrote:
> > The O=/path/to/kernel-<ARCH> option allows to build kernel for different
> > architectures in different output directories, in this scene, it doesn't
> > need the mrproper operation for defconfig anymore.
> > 
> > If really require to clean up the source code tree, let users run the
> > standalone mrproper target on demand.
> 
> But that's precisely what's going to make it more and more annoying
> to run simple tests. The mrproper was there precisely because one
> config at a time was being used, so without it we'll restart to see
> plenty of failures as it used to be before mrproper was added. I
> understand what you're trying to do with the O=, but then if you're
> already passing "O=", why not also pass "defconfig" ?
> 
> I mean, let's make sure this makefile is only used to manipulate
> the tests. It must not become a huge wrapper for the kernel makefile
> otherwise it will become extremely complicated to use to run just a
> simple test. And with this one and the last few ones, I'm starting
> to sense that I'll have to read a README to figure how to reliably
> run a test.
> 
> In my opinion, there are mainly two use cases :
>   - user, manually: commands should be short, forgiving to user
>     mistakes, and easy to remember. I.e. they're compatible with
>     upper-arrow, then enter.
> 
>   - scripts: these are the ones already running in loops with tons
>     of variables, setting object directories with O=$arch/... and
>     taking care of their own cleanups. These ones will already be
>     user-specific and can very well accomodate one or two extra
>     lines for a make mrproper or make defconfig if needed.
> 
> The second ones deserve thinking and control anyway. The first ones
> should mostly not fail for a user mistake and in the worst case waste
> a bit of their time by rebuilding something that could have been
> avoided. But I do want to prioritize the user here. And that's also
> why I want the makefile to be easy to read with as few macros as
> possible, because once it works for you, it's easy to figure what is
> being done, and how to exploit it from your scripts. The opposite is
> not true. Nobody reads a makefile full of macros to try to figure how
> to run their first test or why a test that worked once now fails.
>

Ok, let's reserve mrproper for defconfig and also for tinyconfig if we
add standalone target for it.

let's drop patch and the previous one.

Thanks,
Zhangjin

> Thanks,
> Willy