linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] scripts: kconfig: merge_config.sh: refactor from shell/sed/grep to awk

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <176973183385.175491.5659819632977597738.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 17:10:33 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Nicolas Schier <nsc@...nel.org>, 
 Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] scripts: kconfig: merge_config.sh: refactor
 from shell/sed/grep to awk

On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 12:57:49 +0200, Mikko Rapeli wrote:
> merge_config.sh shell/sed/grep loop scales poorly and is slow.
> With Yocto genericarm64 kernel and around 190 config fragments
> the script takes more than 20 minutes to run on a fast build machine.
> Re-implementation with awk does the same job in 10 seconds.
> Using awk since it is likely available in the build environments
> and using perl, python etc would introduce more complex runtime
> dependencies. awk is good enough and lot better than shell/sed/grep.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kbuild/linux.git kbuild-next

Thanks!

[1/3] scripts: kconfig: merge_config.sh: refactor from shell/sed/grep to awk
      (no commit info)
[2/3] scripts: kconfig: merge_config.sh: use awk in checks too
      (no commit info)
[3/3] scripts: kconfig: merge_config.sh: warn on duplicate input files
      (no commit info)

Please look out for regression or issue reports or other follow up
comments, as they may result in the patch/series getting dropped or
reverted. Patches applied to an "unstable" branch are accepted pending
wider testing in -next and any post-commit review; they will generally
be moved to the main branch in a week if no issues are found.

Best regards,
-- 
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>