From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757382AbbCCWwM (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:52:12 -0500 Received: from cpsmtpb-ews03.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.39.6]:64061 "EHLO cpsmtpb-ews03.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756375AbbCCWwJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:52:09 -0500 Message-ID: <1425423127.24292.172.camel@x220> Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkkconfigsymbols.py: filter reports for tools/ From: Paul Bolle To: Valentin Rothberg Cc: Greg KH , hengelein Stefan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andreas Ruprecht Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 23:52:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1424873723-6311-1-git-send-email-Valentin.Rothberg@lip6.fr> <1425344228.24292.140.camel@x220> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Mar 2015 22:52:07.0583 (UTC) FILETIME=[ACFC7AF0:01D05604] X-RcptDomain: vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 08:55 +0100, Valentin Rothberg wrote: > On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Paul Bolle wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 15:15 +0100, Valentin Rothberg wrote: > > This patch was triggered by perf changes that hit next-20150225, wasn't > > it? If so, we might want to find out why the perf people need to use > > Yes, it was in next-20150225. However, more recent changes have the > same problem. I fear it get's worse for us : ) > > > their > > "$(call detected,CONFIG_EXAMPLE)" > > > > hack. Especially because that hack is also used on existing Kconfig > > symbols (I spotted X86, X86_64, AUDIT, and NUMA). And the usage of both > > valid Kconfig macros and faux Kconfig macros in that hack looks odd to > > me. > > AFAIU it's independent from Kconfig / Kbuild. The usage of Kconfig > symbols seems completely random to me. I think the entire "call detected" mechanism might as well use, say, DETECTED_ for a prefix. That would solve our worries. Please have a look at that hack, and see if I got that right. In that case we might as well send a patch to do something like that and see if the perf developers bark. > Ignoring tools entirely also seems a little too much, since some tools > are still Kconfig sensitive. Hence, I vote to ignore only perf: > > + gitfile.startswith("tools/perf"): My suggestion to only use "tools/perf/config/Makefile" was silly, and you missed an opportunity to mock me. tools/ is special. I'm unsure how to handle it. Assuming checkkconfigsymbols.py will not be used by the "checker complains, so patches must be sent" crowd, I suggest to do nothing. But it's your script, so I defer to your decision. Paul Bolle