From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm2-f12.google.com (mail-wm2-f12.google.com [74.125.225.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20A1947254B for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:25:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.225.140 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789039537; cv=none; b=S3q9Yw1A099WSXAb8eQGAsH19xx+1rcUefGdZosrTs1pg2+6YuFoNcVKcwMAfQNXyShc1+07/iUBEI11f768WR8PR2XGKjCvjfB+op8nZ7hqL0tbYu0DzWV3E+q5Z8zTOcOGkuhEOTZekMol43gdu4u1ilpz4UWBb/9OjUzQ2Ow= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789039537; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ILhGSUejk/Y4nvVR24zvebnkW/PDZEdcYpseEDu6kDU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=JS4R06rzlx3KXDJbMeF/j5XE3PUBSu6dAvpazDa+6u5BDuayuO+PccJKpAwQA3x9jeJMIym4VBNlLl9Mx3gw9c0m9bpcF7gcVLoESiUnRcbql7vEhAfakvfyhQQCoU3SrGN1I8wWU+axwjzyyqw+1nzMgBI6dgytuW/VNTjYs5s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=Fa81zODM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.225.140 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Fa81zODM" Received: by mail-wm2-f12.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49b912e64ccso9215585e9.0 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 04:25:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1789039534; x=1789644334; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=JpU/A1KL3cFEe1xLZy5hIfTjvoDOGfu4pjwD6ajzN3s=; b=Fa81zODMjFWmNH97l5eGF0TaDlKGcrox9KNZ9W7aT44tWi4zN65HPrzHVm6uMT0IxL hWQvPOS9KE2xHHfHGkWB8EkN5FsoZ1YrIJ0NE+TaXFvdCF6zOEl8xpCCRLPulXcCuUqo Vnuzip6sL0cSIHZxnmp3liX9dRy78A0LPSl181d7dgtYyH4RFp2TSXB2+cWQgCMAqmkI JxTmbEf0uwRhKdghKR7QW/MD+1PdN9BUBpMi4jZ7qmFn+FtqYVN14QHoN8f+nFx9rZ0l m49Wy+2LrXkFizlirLyKNTh6q8ndc+aTlqSLe+vki6xkXZG5LvBNmg95qOXdPczaQvpF BcMw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1789039534; x=1789644334; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:sender:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=JpU/A1KL3cFEe1xLZy5hIfTjvoDOGfu4pjwD6ajzN3s=; b=PKu03hTTrnjPgvfc/RNyEXaZQsFHORpLMk94dRnJEI3Qf/9/Ce3WTP6yOyykEzpOZE 9XEukgPwGBhNRI99+f86/OIKJZqwEeh3GuGRkwzNoVZUp5jK0dEoxivGYo9dB7iGg5VR bAtkofEtWGJBRuZK0JSMWds/qodkbY0LhcOLkcxGb0ggdeu3eQzAF8D+kWQaxeMeWHz+ 3Zu2iHH2JPd86uLKEumJiW8/ynu/a/6YvwzQu/zY3lvVizHVTJoxDodbQScVI7ApYwt+ as+aS589HHSgVoPjYH5KVGkHGCr54uX1r3Yw9+mauOwMuiixUGJaPhWvYYW/RrbnLc5n /ptw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBxETg8mfiQlbrjHVl8hbcLp2eD6iQljmBd+C/JujVMHQ4uZC14KU5jg9iucYf6I6ZI+Cr6IK2FWXtXM5nk=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++n3byjbFDv9rgEvQ69uQq+2Aw7dRbUw/v4dfzramADuXGEm/h/2 O15smpJXXC2BLmb3btyXUhzOLbtquQ+E1eVg3yTkZeC6FAfp5GQ89I38MRMkcvZB X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou0kusLdhaiz6DoUdXflNiGyyBiNxugSznOMvQT9WRreIinAvyNR6Ilcs0ccy9Y nGm7ETnacB7dnZQDqPjJj4RSpgEWUo9055L77VbkBDxL2KVLyNsltuG/1P84/h/b3fL6ocS9wLF ML3mKcn3h1kJfnJJPyxG+PucbWlVTs6ZMcoD0C1MsHSlskzXHzYNotrKDtWYIYuja+fje/yqP1B q13pca/wNKI86Uxp5jKQIg+Dgk9U8Df4EDFCT17l9pS4fk9HkB+YcT0amCcgaKVlr+ywUI0Z7ui 5tKYy0Ug5tq0mqedmn4aYjoyYZ0wydhwQWefqJb3s7NL4c5f3I5+vItV4KVKd8KQjiGcWgpGjTf cqEx7n8SLx6+jty4XaTHtW8aY+F5PlEmpcXN0xJycSEwJzutp/vYdjQx5tWmKcKEUqKCgzroXN8 LDKBzDORuJzvxgy0KFpbuxQ2iQjGUNNCewoJp3e3Cp3bnvjku6vEOsyCEk9afJPRL36kxT8gpSg FNfUcwGZ7ZYD5vHIVjqrysd2f3uZfuG9LcIPRl/kkimhqm4SM/JldKKUkeUX2iFKCo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:a315:b0:499:a277:e8b5 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49d258cefc8mr110707615e9.3.1789039534000; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 04:25:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.128.10.232] (195-23-151-163.net.novis.pt. [195.23.151.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-49d26bdb789sm78149765e9.1.2026.09.10.04.25.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 10 Sep 2026 04:25:33 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Julian Braha Message-ID: <71d40a5d-21a7-47ae-aa18-34f640a08779@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 12:25:32 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kconfig: warn about malformed KCONFIG_PROBABILITY values To: Dmitrii Tulnov Cc: nathan@kernel.org, nsc@kernel.org, jacmet@uclibc.org, yann.morin.1998@free.fr, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260910091322.4-1-tulnov.dl@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Julian Braha In-Reply-To: <20260910091322.4-1-tulnov.dl@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/10/26 10:13, Dmitrii Tulnov wrote: > Hi Julian, > > Thanks for the review. I've addressed your comments locally for v3. > Before sending it, I'd like to clarify how the new warning should > interact with KCONFIG_WERROR. > > With KCONFIG_PROBABILITY=50% and KCONFIG_WERROR=1, v2 and my current > v3 still exit successfully and write .config. The warning is printed > directly and does not go through the existing warning/error handling. > > Would you prefer it to become an error when KCONFIG_WERROR is set, > while remaining a warning otherwise, or to stay non-fatal even in > that mode during the compatibility period? I'd lean toward honoring > the explicit strict mode. Yes, better to support it. Thanks! > > For the compatibility tests, I propose comparing the generated > configurations for 50% versus 50:0:0 and -0 versus 0 with the same > seed, and checking that the malformed input produces exactly one > warning. That would put checks for the preserved interpretation in > the submitted tests, in addition to the local comparisons I've run. > Does that sound appropriate for this patch? > Yeah that's fine. > Best regards, > Dmitrii